Is the Dutch defese good?

You're the one who made the argument, these are the logical implications of your own claims. 

The worst kind of dunce is an arrogant one, because it becomes impossible to correct the dunce. In your case this very much applies. 

The Leningrad Dutch use to be the most popular Dutch variation because it had overlap with KID.

High level aggressive players who liked KID would often mix in games with the Leningrad.

I don’t know if it is still popular any more.

I do know the Stone Wall Dutch is very popular among beginners and is often recommended to them.

More chin music ?

You stop that crazy talk righ now!!!! .. before Ibrust brings the heat down on you .. his dietribes are pretty fierce!

Here at chess.com it was explianed only noobs play the Dutch !

😂😂😂😂

Are there lines where the KID can transpose into the leningrad?

I have never suggested anything like this... infact I said noobs should not play the dutch. The most serious use of the dutch via 1... f5 is as a winning weapon in tournament settings or against low level players. Which are things that high level players may do. And transposing into the dutch is alot different than playing it directly, I've advocated for transposing into it from the triangle slav and the english defense. If it's possible to transpose into the Leningrad from the KID this makes the Leningrad alot more compelling in broader contexts.

If you want to contend with my argument then address it directly, otherwise ignore it - but choose one, don't ignore it and then misrepresent it in the dumbest ways. And please spare me the "internet lulz" in the meantime.

You were the one talking crap in the beginning... you were beside yourself with "the lulz" over the fact people found the dutch dubious, while admittedly you never have played it. I don't mind crap talk if a person knows what they're talking about, but if not... it's a problem because you basically have duncery that resists correction, it's rampant stupidity at that point.

The KID usually does not transpose directly to the Leningrad. And the Leningrad does not transpose directly to any King's Indian lines, but it can transpose to the same kind of structure than in King's Indian, if White closes the center with moves like d5 and e4. That rarely happens because it's not usually good for White to do so, since the opening could become some kind of "accelerated" King's Indian, where Black does not have to move f6-knight before he plays f5 like in Classical King's Indian.

Playing d5 and e4 is an interesting try in some 2.g3 variations since White can open the position up exf5 like in:

You might say there's some similarities in ideas (but not in concrete lines) between some variations of King's Indian and the Leningrad, since both openings might involve pushing pawns on the King's side for an attack. But the difference is in the Leningrad you do this without closing the center and for example in the Classical King's Indian the center is closed.

Just to show the Leningrad set up with out White’s moves so people can see what I mean.

Black often aims to play e7 to e5.

When you look at the end set up, It can be similar to a KID set up because the pawn structures in the KID often can mirror the Leningrad.

Just to show you a KID structure for comparison.

Black will often try to play f5 in above position.

You can see how the pawn structures overlap.

The tricky part is whites moves.

If I was to show you the normal looking pawn structure white & black might have in the game below:

The above is 1 set up and another looks below:

Now, when people think about the KID, they never think of the above pawn set ups because in most of the main lines white gains space.

The positions I am showing above are side lines, but they can be very good!

They are the G3 lines or Averbach/Semi-Averbach lines. The position can also come out of the 1…e5 lines vs. English.

Most Dutch players don’t play the Dutch with 1…f5.

They play 1…e6 or 1…g6.

The StoneWall & Classical players start off with 1…e6.

The Leningrad player start off with 1…g6.

If you play 1…f5, White players can play the Anti-Dutch lines which often involves not playing c4.

Moves like Nc3 and omitting c4 all together.

So Dutch players often wait till their opponents have committed c4 before playing f5.

1. d4 e6 2. c4 f5

or

1. d4 g6 2. c4 f5

"Most Dutch players don’t play the Dutch with 1…f5." Citation needed. To me it does not seem to be so, having played d4 for over 20 years and looking at games on my 8 million game database. There are a lot of transpositional lines like the ones you gave, but I don't really think they are more common than 1...f5. The first line you gave, for example, has been played 23528 times and the second one 800 times while 1...f5 has been played 179892 times. There are of course other transpositional lines but I do think 1...f5 is the most common. It seems to be the case also for top GMs. There might be more GMs who might play some better transposition of the Dutch than the dutch itself, but in total it seems to me 1...f5 has been played in most cases.

One more thing: you say the two lines with 1...g6 and 1...e6 prevent Anti-Dutch lines, but if you play 1...e6 you are allowing the Exchange French, which is boring, and you play the Dutch if you want to win at all costs. 1.g6 allows white to transpose to the Modern, which might or might not be worse for Black than the Dutch, and maybe even King's Indian. And you would have to prepare two or three openings against d4. Also Anti-Dutch lines (except for 2.Bg5) are not just that good and might require less preparation than the modern. I would face the Anti-Dutch systems rather than 2.g3. Or 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 d6 4.Bg5 Nbd7 5.Qc2 g6.

Again you make this argument based on the raw numbers, but they seem to favor 1... f5 due to that being a move-1 position.... if you want to know players intent (which relates with perceived viability of the line), and the number of actual players who intend on playing the dutch in a certain position... you should look at move percentage. By using percentages and backtracking through the move tree you could then infer the total number of players who actually intended to include dutch transpositions in their repertoire. It'd be alot of work to do that because there are like a dozen transpositions, but it could be done and I suspect the numbers would outpace the 1... f5 dutch at that point.

For example.... 1. d4 d5 (27%) 2. c4 e6 (40%) 3. Nc3 c6 (16%)
We'd guess that 27% of 40% of 16%, i.e. 1.7% of players intend on playing the triangle slav in this move order, it's just that white doesn't always play the moves leading to the triangle slav.

The c6 > e6 triangle is about the same. So it's like 3.4% of players are reaching a triangle. It's not a perfect estimate but it's close enough.

Alright, so after 4. e6 we have 34% of players playing a dutch transposition. So now we're at like... 1% of players. And the 1... f5 move order is like 2% of players. But there are numerous other move orders that transpose into the dutch...

Yeah, but claim was about raw numbers, no? And if some player might play f5 like in some random Nimzo-line, I would not consider him to be a Dutch player.

It's really about raw numbers of players who are playing the dutch... and how they've decided to reach it. Not just games played. Player count is the meaningful number, it's the way of gauging the opinion of GMs on the matter. Of course we're not really discussing the reason why they're playing the move...

In your scenario the player is certainly not a 1... f5 dutch player but what this says is something about how the dutch is regarded or how people generally think it ought to be used.

I literally showed this claim is false: "Most Dutch players don’t play the Dutch with 1…f5. They play 1…e6 or 1…g6". What does perceived intent have to do about this? Nothing.

It has everything to do with it, since the player who intends on playing the dutch plays the dutch, he just didn't reach the position, and we're talking about numbers of players not number of games.

Ok, concerning your deleted post (and mine), I've looked at some triangle transpositions to the Stonewall. There about 2300 games with the knight on c3, 3000 with knight on f3, but I'm happy to change my mind on the popularity of 1...f5 if you can provide better data on the transpositions. And why are you bringing up some claims about how the Dutch is regarded since I've made no such claims myself? I'm quite aware it has somewhat dubious reputation. I just wanted to point out Compadre's post, which I liked, had a factual error.

You're really not getting this... let me try again.

Compadre made a claim about number of players who play the dutch, and how they prefer to reach it. Not number of games. You are still talking about raw game counts.

To infer number of players from number of games you have to do a little math, which I have done a little bit of, and explained above... there is not a 1:1 ratio between total games of an opening and total players who play it... due to transpositions. If many players play an opening, but they don't reach it very frequently at all due to it being deeper in the move tree... that effects the raw game count but not the player count. On the other hand, if a small number of players play a certain opening... but they reach it on move 1, you are going to still get relatively high game counts, because a single player may have hundreds of games in that position. And we're talking about player count because that's the actual claim made. And it's actually the more meaningful thing to look at if you want to gauge general consensus. Do you understand?

Yes, but you have not calculated the players who play 1...e6 nor 1...g6 nor the triangle transpositions which were not a part of Compadre's claim but you mentioned in the deleted post. The list of players seems much longer with 1...f5. Have you done any calculating? As I said, if you provide numbers of players, I will change my mind.

I did a basic calculation in one of the posts above, only looking at the triangle, and it seems about 1% of players include the dutch in their repertoire via the triangle whereas about 2% include it directly via 1... f5. So just looking at one set of transpositions I'm already halfway there to matching the main line in terms of player count. I think that's enough for me to conclude it's at least a wash overall, there are alot of transpositions I'm not even familiar with but I think e6 dutch would be at least as common as the triangle dutch if not more common. But if you want to do the rest of the math you can go ahead and do that, I'm just pointing out a single aspect of the problem not really intent on litigating the entire debate between the two of you.