Dutch theory issue - no noobs

I have bone to pick with the Dutch theory! Its consistently incomplete!

Every single book I bought ( 5 total ) focuses on the critical variation being the fianchetto. I'm currently at 2000 Blitz and rarely face it, like RARELY! So I'm stuck navigating, at what I can mostly call, bloody ''sample'' chapters that'll skim the theory. -oh yah, play this way and you'll get an advantage. OKAY! so its not critical. BUT HOW DO I PUNISH IT THEN ! WHY IS IT NOT CRITICAL !? And don't you go saying: Yah, obviously engine gives it a +0.5 edge over 0.3 edge.. LIKE DUUUH

So now I'm stuck to trial and error, which is fine, I did get to a respectable Elo by myself at the end of the day. Or choose a different opening.........     F R U S T R A T E D ! ! !

I got

Mihail Marin : Leningrad dutch book 1 and 2

Killer Dutch by Simon Williams: Book  & Chessable course

Stonewall Dutch by Nikola Sedlak

Starting out: Dutch defence by Neil McDonald

This is the same for a lot of openings, I play the Classical Sicilian, the critical variation that all the GMs play is the Richter-Rauzer, and I see that like 1 in 100 games.

The fact that a line is not critical doesn't mean you will be "punishing" it though. White can play a lot of ways against the Dutch and have a small plus. The flank openings tend to mean that White gets a free hand in the early going. It's not possible to map out all the stuff White might play.

Also a little confused about why you have books on the Classical AND Stonewall AND Leningrad Dutch.

If you are facing something like d4, c4, Nc3, Nf3, e3, Be2 that's actually a decent try for white, and in fact it's what I play with black against Bird's Opening ( 1 f4 ). Analyzed in Palliser/Williams/Vigus (2009) Dangerous Weapons The Dutch.

So which variation do you see the most from white when you play? I found I played against a lot of system players, London, Jobava London, Colle. Got a bit fed up of playing spot the system and fiting my Dutch to them. I was playing Classical or Stonewall against anything that was not 1.e4. I also collected a database of over 100 games with top level players high accuracy scores in different Dutch openings. Books do have to leave something out, but there are holes in playing the Dutch which make it hard to punish white. First run through a Dutch opening with the engine black has to be sharp and accurate to not be losing, only 1 or 2 moves as candidate choices. White can play half a dozen different moves on every turn and none of them are bad. So when black learns the Dutch it is only a very specific set up which has to be reached in a certain way, yet it has to adapt to white playing whatever. So, yeah non critical might just mean stick with the long term plan as the moves are no longer sharp and precise for survival, critical is, play this sequence of moves or you will be lost.

If White doesn't fianchetto then play b6 yourself with fine play.

if white does everything i would develop and then castle queenside

Indeed, any setup except the fianchetto is played "a la Queen's Indian" with b6.

The problem is, it's briefly covered, like an honorable mention. Maybe 1 game was shown, a quick overview of ideas and voila! Yeah well, the "voila" is an issue if over 50% of my games I'm stuck playing the b6 variation

Indeed it is fine play, but guess what? The O'Kelly Sicilian also has a dubious response, can you guess? No? The open Sicilian! 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 a6 3.d4.... Yes Yes, the standard response is considered dubious.... AND IT'S COVERED PERFUSIVELY, why?? Because I get it. ALL. THE. TIME !

sigh....

Have you looked at the games of Alexander Alekhine? He has a few with b6 fianchetto and the dsb on the adjacent diagonal. So long as you can control the centre then launching the traditional king side attack should still be possible against a non Catalan set up. Your other good option is to play a stonewall set up, or non fianchettoed classic Dutch.

No noobs? Awww ): .

I have the killer dutch by simon williams (book) and i find that he gives a pretty good selection of lines for the minor variations, he just more focuses on ideas rather than "RAHHH NEED THEORY TO PROVE ADVANTAGE!" though i think he more aims for equality and making a repertoire that stands the test of time instead of proves advantage. dont know about the other books though, ive only needed simon williams book

i agree with every point here, lol dutch just not that great for proving advantage tbh, like when most of the gambits can be slightly better for white and dangerous for black to play into, you know its probably not the best opening, i just play dutch because its fun and easy lol

It is unclear which line you play as you speak Leningrad in one breath and Classical in another.

I will leave all Leningrad Info to the Leningrad players to answer. I play the Classical and the Stonewall, and in the case of those two, I can tell you precisely why the focus is on the Fianchetto.

You should ONLY play the Classical or Stonewall when White fianchettos the Kingside Bishop. The Classical and Stonewall should both be viewed as a last resort. Why, you ask? The answer is simple. Think about Black's first 3 moves. They are f5, Nf6, and e6, in some order. Look at those pawns. The 3 on f5, e6, and d7. That c8-bishop is saying "what the bleep?" Ideally, you want that Bishop on the long diagonal. That is specifically why White fianchettos the kingside. To beat you to the diagonal. What to do when White does not fianchetto depends on whether White commits the Knights

After 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e6 4.Nf3, note the knight cannot go to e2. Black should answer 4...Bb4!, getting an improved Nimzo-type position. You will usually follow up soon with b6 and Bb7.

After other non-g3 lines, like the London or 1.d4, 2.c4, 3.Nc3, 4.e3, or other lines, you play 4...b6 and 5...Bb7, usually followed by 6...Be7 and 7...O-O, after which, if a standard London setup is played, 8...Be4 is very strong.

ONLY IF WHITE FIANCHETTOS should Black play the Classical or Stonewall. ONLY THEN!

So in summary:

1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e6 4.Nf3 - 4...Bb4!

1.d4 f5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 e6 4.Nf3 - 4...b6!

1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e6 4.e3 - 4...b6!

1.d4 f5 2.g3 or 1.d4 f5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.g3 or 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.g3 or any other case where White has played g3 on move 4 or earlier, THEN AND ONLY THEN do you play the Classical or Stonewall. One is not better than the other and is strictly a matter of taste.

I think the knights should move straight cuz why you changing yo mind in the last moment and taking a turn touch grass yo

That is clear stuff Thrillerfan. One clarification and a question:

Clarifiaction: some readers might be a bit consused about 'not playing the classical or Stonewall)'. You are not talking about the question ...e6 vs ...g6 but you are referring to ...d6/...d5 vs no d pawn move at all;

Question: I always wonder why black is trading its dsBishop for the knight on Nc3. I do see some advantages but is still feels counter intuitive. True, if white doesn't defend the knight with it's bishop or queen you can damage their pawnstructure, but if they do protect with 4. ...Bb4 5. Bd2 or 4. ...Bb4 5. Qc2 and follow up with a3 at some point, I am not convinced.

i just got killer king

a3 is slightly weak in some cases (especially Qb3, apparently gaining a tempo, then a5! a3? a4!! and if Qxb4 then Nc6 and the queen is lost) as after a5 then black can eventually follow up with a4 if white allows, bottling whites queenside play and also stopping b4 after a5. But yeah its not easy, which is why Be7 is still a fine option rather than Bb4, just less challenging.

I have already been in heated debates about the Fianchetto line on these very forums!

White can get Slightly Advantage in the opening.

The Advantage is + 0.30

If Black doesn’t play accurately, White will build his advantage into a winning advantage.