I don’t think the absence of Dutch games in the World Championships is *at all* evidence of it being refuted. It just means maybe other openings are safer, especially in a setting where the most common approach is trying to win with white and hold with black.
in your opinion and experience is the dutch a somewhat good and consistent way or combatting against d4 and trying to reach the National Master title? answer is appreciated
I am aware of some people who have made master with the Dutch in their repertoire. So, I guess. But I haven’t played it as black myself OTB.
ah alright but with that awareness, would you say its possible for anyone in the 2000-2150 range to use the dutch and be able to achieve NM? or due to the risky play, it will be inconsistent?
provided an opening is not outright refuted (like the latvian) or just terribly worse with trivial levels of prep at master level, you can get away with a lot. I became NM with 1.b4 as my main weapon for example, with stuff like 1.e4 b6 and 1.d4 nc6 as black.
The reason some openings are so rare even at IM- normal GM level, is not always due to objectivity but because even practitioners cant play them most of the time without inviting knockouts due to overprepped opponents. I would argue flexibility and richness is even more important than pure objectivity (within limits) in the repertoire of a master. This is why creative masters tend to have broad repertoires to partially make up for the narrowness some of their pet lines tend to lead to against prepped opposition.
A friend that is a Life Master and IMO one of the best chess coaches in the country has played 1.f4 for what seems like forever.
aigner? dude is a legend. played him a few times and he was tactically a monster.