I'm up for the challenge. In fact I've already started a little in the Na3 thread. But that's exactly how I do it. You don't want a person who's totally biased towards it (like chess trainor who actually tried to explain 1 Na3 e5 2 h4!). My prediction though is that with best play, black can get a slight advantage at least in most lines.
I Challenge Elubus to...
Sort:
Yeah. chess trainor, well, sucks, to be frank.
I think I should post it in the main forums, because people like Diabeditor are grossly optimistic about quite possibly EVERY opening move, maybe even h4 and a4. I bet he takes the bongcloud seriously.
I've played Diabeditor before. It wasn't a great game; it had some sharp positions and he seemed to know the book lines of the Dutch, but he didn't seem to know how to use it. He kind of left his opening "unfinished" in a way and began a clever ""Knight tour" about 9 moves into the game. He won material quickly, but he nearly left his knight hanging and left his queen side undeveloped.
Well in our game I think I got a very good position and then he blundered so he's down a piece for a pawn with no compensation. I'm not impressed and his position was indeed passive as I thought it would be.
I played him twice. Blundered and lost, but won the other as Black.
gxtmf1 wrote:
I've played Diabeditor before. It wasn't a great game; it had some sharp positions and he seemed to know the book lines of the Dutch, but he didn't seem to know how to use it. He kind of left his opening "unfinished" in a way and began a clever ""Knight tour" about 9 moves into the game. He won material quickly, but he nearly left his knight hanging and left his queen side undeveloped.
The Leningrad Dutch is my main weapon vs. 1. d4. Assuming White plays by the book, I can rattle off the first 10 or 12 moves no problem. It's an opening with a lot of depth, however, and most of the time you reach the middlegame with a full board. Both players have plenty of options on how to proceed, which is why I enjoy it so much.
I have a preference for certain continuations, especially where I can play Qe8, bring my Q to the K-side and pawnstorm. It works if White allows it, which he often does. The problem I have is adjusting for White defending well. My way of playing it has been too all-or-nothing, which is the wrong approach to take in chess. Hard habit to break, I suppose.
Diabeditor wrote:
gxtmf1 wrote:
I've played Diabeditor before. It wasn't a great game; it had some sharp positions and he seemed to know the book lines of the Dutch, but he didn't seem to know how to use it. He kind of left his opening "unfinished" in a way and began a clever ""Knight tour" about 9 moves into the game. He won material quickly, but he nearly left his knight hanging and left his queen side undeveloped.
The Leningrad Dutch is my main weapon vs. 1. d4. Assuming White plays by the book, I can rattle off the first 10 or 12 moves no problem. It's an opening with a lot of depth, however, and most of the time you reach the middlegame with a full board. Both players have plenty of options on how to proceed, which is why I enjoy it so much.
I have a preference for certain continuations, especially where I can play Qe8, bring my Q to the K-side and pawnstorm. It works if White allows it, which he often does. The problem I have is adjusting for White defending well. My way of playing it has been too all-or-nothing, which is the wrong approach to take in chess. Hard habit to break, I suppose.
The thing is, black will not have a big kingside attack if white is playing correctly. If you look at Karpov playing against the leningrad, you can see black getting into passive positions, often because he struglles to get in ...e5. It's solid though.
I have a book on the Leningrad by an international master. I think he is overly optimistic about some of the lines. I used the book as my sort of "bible" to the opening, but certain lines seem very bad for Black.
From time to time I abandon the Dutch and try other things. My only real alternatives to 1. d4 are the Albin Counter Gambit and Blumenfeld Gambit. Albin has produced good results for me, but the Blumenfeld not so much.
The Dutch became popular for awhile at my chess club, and most people used the Stonewall. Playing the Leningrad threw a few people off who thought they were well prepared for it.
I think the Leningrad is very difficult to use, but very powerful. I usually play the Classic Dutch.
I would like to challenge elubus to analyze a specific opening: 1. Na3. He has many times been critical of a certain member for propounding the opening without having provided an analysis. Now, in an analysis, a person must be objective, so I'd like elubus to review this move without reverting to any predisposed judgement. Why? Not for irony. Because it would be hilarious if we posted it in the main forums. Of course, I think that this move is pure bs.