It's even more (forgot that I had the 0-1 filter on). I have 100 games over 2500 elo and in 99 games ..Nf6 was played.
Zero games with ...e5
Anglo-Dutch
Sort:
My guess would be to cover the e4 square.
If 2...,e5 3.e4,... we will have some type of Latvian Gambit. If 3...,Nf6 2. exf5,...
2 days ago
0
#5
I don’t play the Dutch but the reason I’d personally play 2…Nf6 is that after 2…e5, white has the additional option of 3.d4 which can lead to slightly different types of positions.
Whereas after 2…Nf6 3.d4 you’re still in something normal.
so both moves are totally fine but 2…Nf6 is flexible, your opponent also doesn’t know what Dutch setup youll be going for yet either.
2 days ago
0
#6
I play 1.c4 f5 to get the Dutch wich I know. Therefore 2.Nc3 Nf6 and it almost inevitable leads to a normal Dutch.
2...e5 leads to completely other positions. I am playing it in a game on another site right now.
So it is primarily a practical decision I guess
2 days ago
0
#7
I think I see the point.
You play 1. …f5 because you want to play the Dutch. And you follow-up with 2. …Nf6 because… you want to play the Dutch.
(But it is still nagging me a bit. In the normal Dutch you are aiming for …e5. Now you get it for free… . No, not true, not for free… 3. d4).
You play 1. …f5 because you want to play the Dutch. And you follow-up with 2. …Nf6 because… you want to play the Dutch.
(But it is still nagging me a bit. In the normal Dutch you are aiming for …e5. Now you get it for free… . No, not true, not for free… 3. d4).
1 day ago
0
#8
AtaChess68 skrev:
I think I see the point.
(But it is still nagging me a bit. In the normal Dutch you are aiming for …e5. Now you get it for free… . No, not true, not for free… 3. d4).
(But it is still nagging me a bit. In the normal Dutch you are aiming for …e5. Now you get it for free… . No, not true, not for free… 3. d4).
That only true if you are playing the Classical Dutch. If you are playing the Stonewall it is a completely different story!
1 day ago
0
#9
True Tolsted. In another threat i got the following from a GM (and in line what you guys already said):
RoelandPruijssers wrote:
AtaChess68 wrote:
Coincidence: I just posted in the openings forum about 100 topplayers who faced 1. c4 f5 2. Nf3 with black. No one (!) played 2. ...e5 and I wonder why.
Now I stumble over this topic of yours I remember your name was on that list of 100 topplayers and I can ask the question directly:
Spoelman- Pruijssers 2017 (0-1), did you consider 2. ...e5 and if not, why not?
Hello AttaChess68, that game brings me back. I did consider 2...e5, but then it makes more sense to play 1...e5 against 1.c4, with 2.Nc3 f5 as the most likely follow-up. The point of 1...f5 is to aim for a Dutch type of position.
What to play after 1. c4 f5 2. Nc3? And why?
Stockfish prefers 2. ...e5 followed by ...d6, sounds logical. But the 23 >2500 games in my database play 2. ...Nf6 without exception ! Why would that be?
(I am prepping for a game thursday. I think my opponent is a 1. c4 player and I iam used to the classical Dutch).