Play against the Dutch in the Spirit of the Colle-Zukertort System with 2.e3!?

I’ve been playing the Colle-Zukertort system for almost a year, and I’ve been trying to prepare an entire repertoire for White in its spirit. My biggest problem has been to create a universal answer to the Dutch Defense involving e3 an placing a bishop on b2.

My first thought was to answer 1.d4 f5 with 2.Nf3 and then 3.e3, but this isn’t the most ambitious choice against the Classical Dutch (the line where black plays …f5, …Nf6, …e6 and …Be7). White doesn't get anything special if Black plays the following moves:

The improvement I’ve found is to play 2.e3!? and 3.c4 (or 2.c4 and 3.e3). Simply put, the idea behind this modest looking variation is to delay the development of minor pieces and position them depending on the setup Black adopts. Against systems involving an early …e6, I suggest the additional waiting move 4.Bd3.

In the Dutch defense, we can distinguish three main systems for Black 1) the Classical Dutch, 2) the Stonewall and 3) the Leningrad. Here’s how I suggest these openings should be answered and some example games. The example games follow a different move order than what I propose in the very first moves.

Against the Classical Dutch White should play 4.Bd3 and position his/her knights on e2 and c3. This variation often involves playing f3 to prevent …Ne4, expanding on the queenside with a3 and b4 and placing a bishop on b2 or d2. Here's how Capablanca handled this line:

Against the Stonewall White plays again 4.Bd3 and then Nf3, 0-0, c4, b3 and then Ba3 or Bb2 depending on Black’s setup. This is a quite well-known system and the idea behind Ba3 is to exchange Black’s strong bishop on d6 or e7. If Black prevents the exchange with …Qe7, White should place his/her bishop on b2. In this variation White can at some point play Ne5. A knight on e5 blocks Black's dark-squared bishop's prospects. In contrast Black’s outpost on e4 is not that good, since, if Black occupies it with a knight, White can always chase it away with f3.

Interesting. But be prepared to meet a real Dutch player. We are flexible and knows that the 3 setups you mention are meant to meet White's g3. Against e3 we have something other in mind.

The Dutch being a flexible opening is a good point. In fact, to prepare this line I'm building a Chessbase database, and I'm struggling find relevant lines for example against the setups involving ...g6 and ...e6. The only line with a clear cut plan for White, is if Black decides to go to a Stonewall setup.

If you face the Dutch you have to play more aggressively than 2.e3. The Dutch is able to survive comfortably against most systems. Classical, Stonewall and Leningrad will not be troubled by 2.e3. Also a good Dutch player will be able to utilise ideas from hypermodern openings to disrupt your development. Fail to fianchetto the king's bishop, black will fianchetto the queen's bishop, or even develop to a6 just to trade off your bishop. Play Nc3, watch the classical Dutch pretend it is a Nimzo Indian with Bb4 hoping to ruin your queen side or create a weakness. Traditional games are the hopton attack developing the Queen's bishop to g6 to disrupt development, or the gambit lines. It is normal for Black to face Catalan style set ups as often as London or Queens Gambit syle set ups. In the main, Dutch players want to attack where your king is and so developing to castle queen side means classical set up is often pointing in the wrong direction as queen side lacks development. Only Leningrad points well to the queenside. The best way to defeat a Dutch player is to ruin their development plans and trade off their best pieces, also classical and stonewall revolve around outposts on the e file for knights. White can really be a pain if both knights are able to maintain access to the advanced outpost on e5. Black does not want to trade off both knights as they want to use their own outposts. Hope these ideas help for contemplating what you are facing.

Try out the Raphael System with 2. Nc3 and 3. Bg5.

Not a good idea at all. If you play e3, go for C4 setups.

Against any good chess player, you should NEVER get what you are proposing.

Classical and Stonewall, if played correctly, are last resort defenses. Defenses that should ONLY be played when White beats you to the diagonal.

As in 1.d4 f5 (1...e6 is a stronger move order for those playing Classical or Stonewall) 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 e6 4.Bd3 and here, NEITHER 4...d5 NOR 4...d6 is best for Black. They are strictly last resort lines for when White beats you to the diagonal with g3.

Here? 4...b6! And 5...Bb7!

"Against any good chess player, you should NEVER get what you are proposing."

I wonder, have you looked the position after 1.d4 2.e3/c4 and 3.c4/e3 in a database? I'm using Chessbase's 8 million game database, and in the majority of cases they seem to transpose to something similar to my three main lines with an emphasis on lines that involve playing ...e6, ...Be7 (or Bd6) and b6 (intending Bb7) or d6 (intending ...e5). The play is fluid in these lines and actual play be quite different from the examples I've posted.

Stonewall setups are also quite popular, but I do agree, they are not the most critical variations.

The line involving 4....d6 (transposing to a Leningrad) has been the choice of Nakamura and Mamedyarov against this setup and scores quite decently for black, so I don't think you should discard it this quickly.

As for the line you posted, did you notice that I'm not advocating for 2.Nf3 exactly because of the queenside fianchetto line that I gave? That's the main point my post. 4...b6 and 5...Bb7 usually transpose to something similar. And the response I propose for this move order is in the Capablanca game.

That's a good system, especially against weaker opponents. I've played it for many years.

The main point of ...b6 and ...Bb7 has nothing to do with the Knight on f3.

Your pawns are on f5, e6, and d7. Your Bishop is biting on Diamond - forget Granite. If he can get to the open diagonal, ideally, that is where it needs to go. It is not to trade off on f3. And even with Nf3, if White plays g3 by move 4, then 4...b6 is not best. For example, even after 1.d4 e6 2.c4 f5 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.g3, Black is better off playing 4...d5 or 4...d6.

So it doesn't matter what move order you use. 1.d4 e6 2.e3? f5 3.Bd3 Nf6, unless White plays 4.Qf3, Black's next move will be 4...b6.

Very interesting! Beware of 4… b6 5. Ne2 Bb7 6. 0-0 Bd6, however, as it’s much more active and aggressive than 6… Be7 in the Casablanca game, and so you’ll have to play 7. f3 Nc6 8. a3 0-0 9. Nbc3, and Black’s position will be a bit more comfortable than with 6… Be7.

I do think that the move order matters. My move order allows White to play Nf3 against the Stonewall and Ne2 against most other e6 setups. Against your line, play is very different with a knight on e2 than on f3 and actually White has won a larger chunk of games with Ne2 than with Nf3 provided that he develops the minor pieces along the general lines I suggested. For example after 1.d4 e6 2.e3 f5 3.Bd3 Nf6 4.c4 b6 5.Ne2 Bb7 6.0-0 (which follows the move order you gave) White has scored 68,8 % in my 8 million game database. The results wouldn't of course be this good, if this was a generally known line, and furthermore there are only 19 games on it in my database, some games are old and some games are below master level.

In contrast, lines involving an early Nf3 have scored less than 50 % if Black follows my ...Bb7 fianchetto line. My impression is also that Ne2 lines are preferred to Nf3 lines by Stockfish 16 if you look deeper in the position by making typical moves. I spent a few evenings analyzing the ramifications of these lines before I made my post.

Yeah, ...Bd6 is a serious alternative and might be better than ...Be7, but thus far Black has had better score with ...Be7 lines.

The sac on h2 is of course a serious threat and White should prevent it as you suggested with 7.f3, which is a typical move in these lines. Who knows, if White is careless, in some lines involving ...Bd6 there might even be a possibility to a make double bishop sac on h2 and g2. Recently, I got a chance to make such a sac when I played the Colle-Zukertort opening with White. In this opening White often captures on c5 to open the b2 bishop's diagonal, a pattern that I learned from Simon Williams' course on Chessable. Here's the game: