Leningrad, Classical, or Stonewall

I was wondering of the general characteristics/statistics of the "big three" Dutch opening options as Black.  I have been playing a variety of systems as Black, but I think I should settle down with the Dutch.  Your responses will be much appreciated.

I don't think anyone else can tell you what openings/variations will work for YOU. You  need to keep track of minor details like your results with each line (easy to do with the games you play here since it's done for you) and you need to figure out which lines suit your style taking into consideration the following factors (for starters)

1. Do you prefer to attack, defend or counter-attack?

2. Do you prefer tactical or positional play?

3. Do you prefer open, semi-open or closed games?

Whatever you play you should seriously consider buying a book written by a respected IM or GM about your preferred opening - a "How to Play" or "Learn the (whatever) Opening" At the very least you should own MCO-15 for reference purposes (for all openings). GOOD LUCK!

I agree.  I would just like to take the opinions of those who play these lines.

There's also the Pseudo-Dutch line of the Nimzo Indian Rubenstein variation.

Oh, yes:

I vote that you play none of them!

There is a reason why that is not the main line.

And there is also a reason that it is played by many high level GM's. I have many games by Kasparov, Grischuk, Gelfand, etc in my database.

It is a sideline which releases the tension very early on.  Nothing to be feared as Black.

EDIT: In the variations without Black playing an early ... d5, but rather ... Nf6.

Then give a line in which black will equalize. What move would you play next for example?

2. ... Nf6.  I did not say Black could equalize (I quite frankly don't know if he can), but rather that the line is nothing to be feared because of the early release of tension.

I would say play the classical and the stonewall (you need to know stonewall structures anyway, regardless o which dutch you choose) change depending on your mood.

I played the Leningrad myself for a fair while, and it does lead to some interesting positions however it is extremely difficult to play, so i wouldnt recommend it. 

2... Nf6 isn't the best move. Black should instead probably play d5, when after Bf4 the only real try is 3...a6!, as everything else just leads to a dutch position with gain of tempo for white. After 4. e3 Nf6 5. h3!? e6 6. g4 white has rather good pressure against black's structure, and black should end up worse. More common are 5. Bd3 and 5. Nf3 however, with positions similar to dutch with no c4 but black having "wasted" a tempo to play a6.

If 2... Nf6 3.Bg5 d5 (probably has to be played anyways) 4. f3 is extremely interesting (other tries include 4. f3 e6 5. g4!? (or other quiter moves) and 4. Bxf6) and as far as I can tell white has an advantage. If black plays 2...d5 white could probably transpose to these lines, but without the knight on f6 it is more difficult, as black can meet 3 Bg5 with g6, Bg7, and later Nf6.

In short, black probably has some chances if he knows the line very well, but if black makes any slight mistake white can gain a huge advantage. For example, 1. d4 f5 2. Nc3 d6 3. e4 is just crushing, and while 1. d4 f5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. Bg5 e6 is played frequently, white should gain easy play with 4. e4 (see the famous Lasker v Thomas game).

And in my opinion the best dutch variation is probably Lenigrad. I like some stonewall positions, but if white can achieve his ideal setup black has some difficulties. I don't believe classical is that critical.

You do have a good point though, while leningrad is probably objectively best, I would never consider playing it myself without first doing a ton of analysis.

Black need not play an early ... d5 at all against 2. Nc3.  3. ... d5 in your line is not forced or even needs to be played.

I agree as well that the Leningrad seems harder to play.