Everyones opinion on the Stonewall attack

I'm new to this site and am around a 1350 to 1450 rated player as of now.  I'm curious what everyones opinion is on the stonewall attack opening.  Ive been using it with pretty good success.  I'm finding that the move order changes a lot based on what Black does.  

I think it's not a good idea to play the Stonewall Defense as White. I can't really justify calling it an attack just because it uses the white pieces, as White isn't attacking anything. Black will just play Bf5 early in the game and White won't have any reasonable attacking plans.

Its not the only opening i use but i have used it a lot and only a few times have i had to change plans after a player has moved their Bf6.  Most times i find myself masking that im going to go into the stonewall.  The other opening im learning is the scilian Najdorf for white and obviously theres a lot of high regards for that opening.  

I used to play it a lot. Mostly I don't now, because I find I can generally get better games from other openings, but I'm glad to have it as a fall-back opening system (easy to transpose into from a lot of things) that I know inside-out and get a playable position sustained by theory at least as far as move 12 or so before I'm having to think much.

Being little-played at master level, database preparation won't help much, but computer preparation is invaluable, even if it's just playing the 8-12 first moves over and over again against a computer, so it'll highlight any problems with your move-order choices.

You'll not get a +ve score out of the opening with the Stonewall Attack against the best play from Black, but you'll get a solid game, which if you're playing a strong opponent may be better than you would have done playing some highly theoretical opening (Sicilian, Ruy Lopez, etc). Against weaker players, you'll likely get a decent +ve score, but then you probably would with any opening with which you feel comfortable.

Ultimately, if you like it, and are getting good results with it, then rock and roll.

i thought against the bf5 stuff, white could play Be2, and Nh4 attacking f5, making the bishop move, similiar to some dutch stonewall lines. Objectively, white has no advantage, but there is still a game to come about. The position is probably just = you shouldnt care though, play it out!

For some reason, i think people assume I am committing a crime whenever i say not to fight for the advantage in the opening...like what the hell is that about? Just play what you feel good about. 

I dont mind it, though I prefer the london, it feels more flexible.

Yeah, but if you play it like a 'system' (blind d4 Nf3 Bf4 e3 c3 etc) you will end up in a two results position where you are playing for a draw or loss.

DEFINE Stonewall attack please !

it is an excellent way to win against a program. I tried it.

Many games work out like similarly to the following.

1.d4 d5, 2.e3 e6, 3.Bd3 c5, 4.c3 Nc6, 5.f4 Nf6, 6.Nf3 Be7, 7.00 00, 8.Nbd2 c4 

which is a huge positional mistake. White plays Bc2 and obtains a kingside attack with Ne5, Rf3, Rh3, g4 etc., while black does not reach counterplay in time on the queenside.

Seems like the fun is gone when Black plays 1. ...d6 or the KI Defense-- no more Stonewall for White!  And an early Bf5 by Black can also defang the Stonewall.

Well, I won a white stonewall attack in 14 moves once at a 90 30 control.

But that doesn't change my opinion that it is a lousy opening and the Queen's Gambit is much better.

I say it is great against regular players. By this i mean players that rarely play chess in a month or year. Might even get a couple wins here but once your know to play it the advantage is your opponents. Several ways to bust it up if your opponent thinks it is lock you will play it.

Mix in the Torre Attack and Reti for opponents that like to look at your stats before the game to keep them off balance. Maybe not them but you get the idea.

This is true, which is why adding in the trompowsky, torre and 150 attack is important.

You can't actually play the 150 attack against much of anything.

Trompowsky also is less effective if Black doesn't play 1...Nf6

and Torre is most useful against g6 setups (and 150 attack generally ineffective against anything else)

so you should have something in mind for 1...d5 as well :)

I meant each system as an individual part of the white repertoire, for example.

1.d4
1..d5- London (or stonewall, whatever)
1..nf6 Trompowsky
1..g6 150 attack

The torre is a kind of fill in the holes system for me. Mostly it comes out of lines such as 1.d4 nf6 2.bg5 e6 3.nf3. But also at odd points throughout the repertoire.

Also, it was my understanding torre is most effective in the classical 1.d4 nf6 2.nf3 e6 3.bg5 situation.

A couple players on this site and all they play is the Torre and win! I keep it around and use it from time to time and not just against g6 setups. Where did you get that info?

From Torre experts, who generally only enter the setup against KID players because the shape after 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.Bg5 Bg7 4.Nbd2 d6 5.e4 or 5.c3 and 6.e4 gives White some chances for opening advantage.

I played this setup myself today in a USCF-rated tournament game against a player rated about 1750 and won in 18 moves.

Bravo sir! Model finish indeed.