11434 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
The sharpest reply to 1. d4 is to not ask for sharp replies to 1. d4 and instead start learning about some of the subtler aspects of chess such as positional play, as that will take you further and enrich you more.
The Dutch Benoni or whatever is complete bs
Is your opinion based on experience? Not trying to start an arguement -- I sincerely want to know. I've seen GMs and masters play it, so how can it be "complete bs"?
It might be ok as a surprise weapon, but the fact remains that Black's position simply isn't good after 2...f5...which is why nobody good uses it as more than a surprise weapon.
Okay fair enough (it is in fact rarely used, as you say). I respect your opinion since you are a fairly strong player. So, I'd like to know your opinion about the Dutch defense in general. Would you say that any of the Dutch main lines are good enough to recommend to a friend?
I get the impression that many who play the Dutch think that 1.d4 c5 2.d5 f5 is just too risky.
I believe 1 d4 c5 2 d5 f5 is classified under the old benoni ....
The Dutch is a respectable (albeit slightly risky) defense. It's not completely trusted at elite levels, but Nakamura and Svidler still play it occasionally. Several GMs (ex. Simon Williams) and many titled players use it as their main answer to 1 d4. The Dutch is fine, the Benoni f5 thingy is dubious and doesn't make a whole lot of sense positionally.
The Dutch is fine by itself (as long as you're fine with the risk that it entails), so if you want to go for it, feel free. It's a decent defense, but there is the chance it may not be your style. As for the Clarendon Court/"Dutch Benoni" (1. d4 c5 2. d5 f5), it really isn't that good at all. I play both the Old Benoni and Dutch myself occasionally, and they're both good by themselves, but combining the two isn't a good idea. The main problem is that it gives Black a bad position that's actually very awkward to defend, and White has a number of ways to have an edge, so Black has to play very carefully to have anything close to an equal game. That said, it looks like it can work at amateur level if you're willing to put a lot of effort into it, but there are better defenses out there that are more dependable and more worth your time than the Clarendon Court.
1 d4 c5 2 d5 f5 = A43 , Old Benoni: Mujannah formation
This line does very poorly for black after 4 different 3rd moves for white : 3 e4 , g3 , Nf3 and even g4 .
@XPLAYERJX, thanks for posting that Clarendon Court game, I enjoyed it. Based on what I saw, you seem experienced with that defence. Do you play it regularly? I have studied GM John Levitt's DVD about it, and I play it once in a while with mixed results. My chess expert friends tell me it is positionally unsound. What do you think?
I watched some of that Video by John Levitt and to be honest I have added this line to my repertoire however I have added it under my bullet/blitz repetoire and the simple reason is becuase I love the KID more than this line which would be my only reason.
I believe this line can be playable;however, I did play some 5 min games with it and found myself in some tangled positions against 2000+ players so I'm not sure if standard play with it would be that great only reason is becuase with so much time the chances of a person timeing out are slim and the chances of them findin the best moves higher;however, I have run thru stockfish and it doesnt find a huge edge for white in many positions so yeah there might be chances of drawing possiblity's
1 d4 c5 2 d5 f5 = A43 , Old Benoni: Mujannah formation <<-- many chessdate bases list it like this however GM John Levitt considers the position the Clarendon court becuase of the court grib which can be made in the center
In humble opinion If the Leningrad Dutch and the Beninoi were to have an offspring this is what it would be
The Kingside ressembles the Leningrad Dutch with the fenchetteo and the Queenside is that of the Benioni
3.e4 bascially thats the same Staunton Gambit that is use in the dutch
3.g3 Is a very positional solid way makings pawning storming kingside harder just like the Dutch
3.Nf3 Im not sure about this move I saw Nc3 as a strong move recommended by stockfish but Nf3 not sure what the intition behind this is
3.g4 in the Essence of Chess.com Hack attacks castling queenside
These lines as the NM Reb stated are pretty deadly man I wouldnt say you are in grave danger but you should be careful if you tend to play it in a standard time control however many players dont play this they play 3.c4 which in fact is a major mistake by white because your queenside is that of the benioni thus makin a6,b5 stuff undermind the c4 pawn bascially becomes a target stockfish game c4 as -0.20 so in fact it gives black a small advantage. C4 is usually played in all d4 lines so if white plays auto pilot he gets in trouble he needs precise move here of 1 of the 4 above but even thing position isnt hugely better for white alot of game left and as of yet there has not been a refutation found to it
Even though I agree with your surpise weapon statment I strongly Disagree with your second statement but the fact remains that Black's position simply isn't good after 2...f5. the Dutch is played with 1. f5 and it is considered solid and you really dont know what white will do in response he can find himself in trouble really fast if he doesnt know the precise moves
I would just like to say thanks Turbofish for helping me learn a new line
Okay, here are my personal notes on all of this:
1) Never, never trust engines with openings, especially on move 3. Way too unreliable.
2) 5-min games don't really mean much for an opening, too little time to think (although definitely much more preferable than 1-min bullet games).
3) The Dutch isn't really considered "solid" at all, but it's definitely playable. Just because the Clarendon Court looks similar to it doesn't mean the solidity of the Dutch applies to it.
4) Yes, you are right that the Benoni focuses on queenside counterplay while the Dutch focuses on the kingside, and both are effective at their respective sides. However, you can't really go for both at once without causing problems, and it's especially so in this case, because you're practically ignoring the center which has been weakened a TON by both c5 and f5 being played. Plus, there's the issue with the d7 and e7 pawns, even more so with White's cramping d5 pawn. In related Benoni structures, it's important to have a pawn on d6 to restrict the d-pawns advance, but doing so will leave the e7 pawn weak. On the other hand, if Black tries to get rid of the pawn with a quick e6, Black's potential influence on the center decreases as he can't focus on a push to e5 (which is very useful in the Leningrad Dutch). Essentially, by pushing both the c-pawn and f-pawn forward, he's unnecessarily weakened the center (and his overall position) by trying to focus on both the queenside and kingside, and in my opinion it isn't really viable as anything other than a surprise weapon.
5) 3. c4 is definitely a bit suspect overall, but you really didn't do anything to address how to meet the other moves. Honestly, I don't trust Black's game from the positions that result from the better moves, and I would rather play an opening where I still get a decent position even against best play, instead of one where I hope my opponents don't know the right moves.
Overall, though, you're the one playing the opening, and there's nothing we can do to stop you from playing it (and plus I'm pretty sure some stronger players will pick at certain problems of my above statement). If you want to play it, fine, go ahead, and good job for you if you do well with it. That doesn't necessarily mean it's the best, though, and you'll have to accept these problems sooner or later if you decide to keep on playing it.
Agree with all of the above
Okay, here are my personal notes on all of this:1) Never, never trust engines with openings, especially on move 3. Way too unreliable. I believe this statement is contradicting to what you have said to move 2 "you're practically ignoring the center which has been weakened a TON by both c5 and f5 being played" How esle would you know c5 and f5 is weakening? with out an engine or a comparision of millions of other games that have been played i.e a datebase which techinically is what engine evaluation analysis is an evaluation of the current position compared to other millions of games.Unless your goin off of your own personal experience but than how could we take your personal experience over a GM's? when GM Jon Levitt made DVD's about this line??So if we cant trust an engine with move 3 why should we trust its opinion about move 2 when it gives white a slight edge after c5 and f5 is played? or how about after move 20? You either trust it or you dont trust it. I dont see how you can say not to trust it after move 3 when many have trusted it after move 2? or even 22? pretty contradicting if you ask me2) 5-min games don't really mean much for an opening, too little time to think (although definitely much more preferable than 1-min bullet games). I did say i would play this line in time controls of 1-5 mins just because I prefer other lines in longer games compared to this one3) The Dutch isn't really considered "solid" at all, but it's definitely playable. There are 3 mainlines in the Dutch to say none of them are solid is a true mistake on your part GM's play the Dutch, The classical Dutch, Stonewall Dutch, Leningrad Dutch and to say none of them are solid is a crime especially when many consider the StoneWall Dutch being Rock Solid with an impenetrable center Just because the Clarendon Court looks similar to it doesn't mean the solidity of the Dutch applies to it.I never said anything about its solidity I just said the Kingside of the Clarendon Court has a similar appearance of that of the Leningrad Dutch and it does have that so that statement was true4) Yes, you are right that the Benoni focuses on queenside counterplay while the Dutch focuses on the kingside, and both are effective at their respective sides. However, you can't really go for both at once without causing problems. I never said you had to go for both at the same time I simply stated that with this set up you have the option of goin queenside or kingside and in life as well as in chess having tons of options is better than having none or even 1 option. and it's especially so in this case, because you're practically ignoring the center which has been weakened a TON by both c5 and f5 being played.Plus, there's the issue with the d7 and e7 pawns, even more so with White's cramping d5 pawn. The d5 pawn usually gets locked by a d6 pawn push by black causing the center to get locked and when the center is locked the only way to play is on the "WINGS" giving black the advantage as well as having the luxury to play either queenside or kingside however it is not all sunshine and rainbows by doing this d6 push black does create a hole on e6 which black has to be mindful of however I havent had huge problems with it yet tough for white to exploit the e6 hole In related Benoni structures, it's important to have a pawn on d6 to restrict the d-pawns advance, but doing so will leave the e7 pawn weak.It does become a weak pawn but unless white can put pressure on it than its a weakness that is not so easily exploited On the other hand, if Black tries to get rid of the pawn with a quick e6, Black's potential influence on the center decreases as he can't focus on a push to e5 (which is very useful in the Leningrad Dutch). I would not play e6 as black for that is a bad idea all together what you can do is play a well timed e5 which would cause white to take immediate action becuase the En Passant rule only lasts once after the pawn has been moved it takes some timing and some careful consideration of course becuase white does have the opition to capture En Passant but if you can time it right many times they wont take. perfect example would be if you play e5 with the intition of them capturin than playin a quick d5 again with 2 pawns in the center e and d pawn you also have the luxury to crack the center and put extreme pressure down the center with these breaks as well and if they dont capture en passant well than you got your e5 push with a kingside attack underway like that of the DutchEssentially, by pushing both the c-pawn and f-pawn forward, he's unnecessarily weakened the center (and his overall position) I still have 2 center pawns and c pawn and f pawn are also controlling 2 center squares (e4,d4) I dont see how I have weakened the center in any way in fact I believe you gain more control over the center so this statement seems wrong to me only weakening that can be in question here is my kings safety from the f pawn push by trying to focus on both the queenside and kingside, and in my opinion it isn't really viable as anything other than a surprise weapon. again I believe your under the impression that im doing both at the same time which is not true If I chose to do a queenside and my opponent lets me I will keep going and break through on the queenside if he closes it off/locks the pawns than I can switch to the kingside or vice versa I dont see how you think I'm doing both at once?5) 3. c4 is definitely a bit suspect overall, but you really didn't do anything to address how to meet the other moves. There are only 4 moves that are good for white 4 different 3rd moves for white : 3 e4 , g3 , Nc3 and even g4. Any other moves either cause the position to be relatively equal or give black a slight advantage example would be as I stated previously 3. c4 gives black a .20 advantage
If you wish to know how to address these moves I recommend you do exactly what I did do research on the line with different chess databases, do evaluation with chess engines, as well as watch youtube videos on the line 1 very good youtube video is labeled " Extra-Sharp New System against 1. d4!- GM Jon Levitt" He addresses these lines in better detail and the video is free preview I myself didn't buy the DVD becuase I only plan to use this line as a Side line I prefer the KID more than this one however it was a very instructive 15 min video that addresses these lines
Honestly, I don't trust Black's game from the positions that result from the better moves, and I would rather play an opening where I still get a decent position even against best play, instead of one where I hope my opponents don't know the right moves. If you watch that youtube video that I mentioned above you will see that the positions that arise are not that great black still has alot of fightin chances white definitely has to be carefulOverall, though, you're the one playing the opening, and there's nothing we can do to stop you from playing it (and plus I'm pretty sure some stronger players will pick at certain problems of my above statement). If you want to play it, fine, go ahead, and good job for you if you do well with it. That doesn't necessarily mean it's the best, though, and you'll have to accept these problems sooner or later if you decide to keep on playing it. There is no line in chess that is considered perfect. Every line has its own weaknesses as well as strengths. It is our job as chess players to exploit our opponents weaknesses while using our lines strengths to our advantage to win the game. This thread was based on sharp 1.d4 lines Turbofish commented about the Clarendon Court my first impression was that cant be a real line it looks completely nonsense but it made me interested into doing research about it. As I began researching it and watching different youtube videos of it. It made me want to play it. I than began playing it and found myself liking it and even though I already have a line against 1. d4 I have sense added the Clarendon Court to my repertoire to shake things up. If you dont wish to play it or even try it that is again completely up to you but just keep 1 thing in mind.100 years ago during the time of Steinz many players considered the Sicilian defense an inferior line becuase it didnt place a pawn directly in the center over 100 years later the Sicilian defense has become 1 of the top mainline lines against 1. e4. My question to you fireflashghost is will you spend the rest of your chess life with the same dogma as they did? Or will you be the one to give it a try and say what is the worse that can happen I lose a game??
I believe Fiveofswordssaid it best
That red font is frying my retinas. How about typing in one font color like most normal humans?
Should I use another font besides red otherwise how esle will you distinguish my responses from his?
@XPLAYERJX, thanks for posting the interesting games related to discussion of the Clarendon Court defense. I'm glad you found that approach worth exploring.
I do take seriously the criticisms contributed by fireflashghost and NM Reb. I accept that the Clarendon Court defense (1.d4 c5 2.d5 f5) is considered dubious/borderline-unsound by many knowledgeable players. But I'm attracted to off-beat controversial openings. Not only for their surprise value, but also because I enjoy studying unusual asymmetrical positions.
With the riskiness of this opening fully in mind, I'll continue to experiment with it. On those occasions when I chicken out and decide to play it safe (at a slow time control tournament), I will use related openings like the Dutch, King's Indian defense, or the Queen's Indian.
benoni is sharp
and is the son of the sorrow
1. d4 e6
This is quite sharp. If you don't find occasional transposition to french as a buzz kill you might even like it.
I do take seriously the criticisms contributed by fireflashghost and NM Reb.
NM Reb statement really isn't criticism his statement is actually factual any chess database will acknowledge that those 4 different moves give white a slight advantage not a huge advantage however a small one and as black you will have to respond accordingly or you can find yourself in trouble
fireflashghost I found many of fires critism's contradictorly and/or confused I think his only good advice was his 2'nd point I found inconsistany's in his other agruements which just shows a pure lack of understanding of the line
I accept that the Clarendon Court defense (1.d4 c5 2.d5 f5) is considered dubious/borderline-unsound by many knowledgeable players. 100 years ago the Sicilian defense was considered a dubious/borderline-unsound line today its considered one of the most played lines maybe in a 100 years from now every1 will be playing the Clarendon Court
^^ nothin wrong with having back up lines I myself love the KID which I play regularly the only problem now I have is finding enough players to play d4 against me so I can play either line lol alot of e4 players on this site lol
Admins: Spam alert, you may wish to check this
by ConnorMacleod_151 a few minutes ago
9/21/2014 - End to End
by smarques 9 minutes ago
Is Aronian overrated
by Skand 13 minutes ago
Hou Yifan about to become strongest female player in the world
by Erik-the-Viking 16 minutes ago
by notmtwain 19 minutes ago
Hou Yifan preparing to replace Judit Polgar as Women's #1?
by Elubas 19 minutes ago
Advantage out of Nothing
by outofmedicine 23 minutes ago
How to make FIDE tournament more interesting ??
by deeptak 29 minutes ago
What openings can i use against the computer3- HARD ?
by Chessnovice25501 47 minutes ago
My wins against NM!!
by w_Chinmay73 58 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2014 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!