The Dutch is used for an exciting kingside attack. Many top grandmasters employ the Dutch in must-win games. I use it sometimes in blitz when I want to have some fun.
Why would you play dutch in the first place?
Sort:
Plenty of Grandmasters and International Masters play the Dutch. Plenty of 1200-player talk about how the Dutch is worthless. Hmm, I think I see a pattern!
Oct 20, 2021
0
#44
Laskersnephew wrote:
Plenty of Grandmasters and International Masters play the Dutch. Plenty of 1200-player talk about how the Dutch is worthless. Hmm, I think I see a pattern!
Burn.
Oct 20, 2021
0
#45
My favorite Dutch Defense is a good swift kick to the groin with wooden clogs!
Oct 20, 2021
0
#46
"Why would you play dutch in the first place?"
---
I'll try to answer the question, just for the sport. higher-rated players, or Dutch players, are welcome to correct me. let's see how accurate I got.
---
As far as I know:
Classical Dutch - give up some space for attacking chances. see GingerGM.
Stonewall Dutch - Played by Botvinnik and Carlsen - Positional, Defensive. Space-grabby.
Leningrad Dutch - A try to play K.I.D setup with 2 tempo up because f5 has already been played. Gotham say it's terrible, and that he only plays it because he's lazy.
---
About the diagram, they play 1...e6, and only then f5 - to avoid 2.Bg5!
---
"people probably play the dutch because they want to lose" ahh, priceless.
There's a commerical with cowboys, when it says "Americans love to win", so someone asked "as opposed to Other nations, who like to lose?". okay, if it's time for jokes, I'm all in:
Shallow and pedantic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yetwdpsiM8Q
Oct 20, 2021
0
#47
Leningrad is one of the sharpest lines possible, I would say only the sicilian and some advance caro and classical French lines beat it when it comes to calculation.
Oct 20, 2021
0
#48
I believe GM Malaniuk (or something like that spelling) plays the Leningrad regularly.
As for the original question of why people play the Dutch, most likely because it's not a regularly seen answer to 1. d4...I myself prefer the Dutch Stonewall as an answer to d4, and this particular line has been noted by notable GMs as being a solid answer to d4 by black.
xr_paliouras wrote:
Laskersnephew wrote:
Plenty of Grandmasters and International Masters play the Dutch. Plenty of 1200-player talk about how the Dutch is worthless. Hmm, I think I see a pattern!
IM Rosen plays the Stafford Gambit, because a titled player plays a certain opening that doesn't specifically mean that the opening is objectively good.
IM Rosen has never played the Stafford Gambit in a serious rated game, and he never will! Top grandmaster have used the Dutch many times in important grandmaster tournament. There's the difference
Oct 21, 2021
0
#51
The Dutch is fine. It wins just as much as anything else and you can make it all the way to GM playing it as your main response to d4.
Too many people are obsessed with what the computer says or what are the main weapons in Super GM arsenals. Who are we kidding? How many of us will be Super GMs? How many of us are playing against Stockfish? (ok, maybe that happens in some games but you're going to lose those no matter what you play)
If you know the theory, know the plans, and like it, there is absolutely zero reason not to play it.
FrogCDE wrote:
OK, as a Dutch player: one reason to play Dutch is that so many White players think they can crush it and overextend themselves trying to do so. Those who do don't usually understand it very well. They think it weakens the Black kingside and that's where they should attack. Actually, in most Dutch lines White's chances are on the queenside, and it's Black that gets the kingside attack.
Even though I did study the Dutch, I still struggle with it. No one plays it so it is a surprise. Sure, I was able to get a Fool's Mate against it but it's not that easy to refute
Carlsen, Caruana, Aronian, Grishuk, Nepomniachtchi, and Nakamura have all played the Dutch in Important tournaments. But why pay any attention to them when someone rated 1625 on Chess.com can tell you that the Dutch is sub-optimal?
Oct 21, 2021
0
#54
Always take the advice of a 600 daily player, and just ignore those GM's that play it.
Oct 21, 2021
0
#55
As a Dutch player, there are plenty off reasons one may want to play it, it offers black good winning chances as the positions are pretty crazy and imbalanced. And how does one "refute" this setup with 1.e6 instead of 1.f5?
So while yes the Dutch is a bit risky I don't see a way to refute this setup. If any players do see a way to, please let me know.
Oct 21, 2021
0
#56
In a way, the Dutch is to 1.d4 as the Sicilian is to 1.e4.
They both use a wing pawn to immediately challenge white's idea of establishing a classical center.
Sicilian Defense
Dutch Defense
I recently began studying the Dutch, and it's a lot more potent than some people think.
Both the Classical Dutch and the Leningrad have a lot going for them, and they can lead to both sharp and positional games.
When you see top grandmasters playing it, they aren't just bumbling through the motions of some obscure, inferior defense. There are actually important move orders and distinct ideas, in which both sides are fighting for control of key squares.
It's quite a fascinating defense, actually.
ricorat after 8 Nxe4 8... fxe4 9 Ne1! White is ready to undermine the center with f3 and Nxf3. For example 9... d5 10 Be3! 10... Nc6 11 Rc1 where White can play f3 next and Black has no counterplay. Alternatively 10... Nd7 11 Qc2! White defends c4 and is ready to play f3. 11... Nb6 12 c5 12... Nc4 but White has 13 Bxe4. in the previous variation Black can try 11... Nf6 but after 12 f3! 12... dxc4 13 Qxc4 13... Nd5 White is glad of having played Ne1 instead of Ne2 because he has 14 Bc1! Black can't play 14... e3 because of 15 Nc2 rounding up the pawn. This awesome analysis by Sam Shankland shows that while the Dutch doesn't lose by force Black has by far better options
Oct 21, 2021
0
#59
ricorat wrote:
As a Dutch player, there are plenty off reasons one may want to play it, it offers black good winning chances as the positions are pretty crazy and imbalanced. And how does one "refute" this setup with 1.e6 instead of 1.f5?
So while yes the Dutch is a bit risky I don't see a way to refute this setup. If any players do see a way to, please let me know.
Hey Rico,
You might want to consider 7...Qe8 instead of an immediate 7...Ne4.
...Qe8 is considered the "standard" move there, as it allows the queen to redirect to g6 or h5, depending on the position's needs.
It also allows black a little more time to uncoil, before immediately clarifying the ideas in the center.
Stil1 I think Black has to go for Ne4 because if 7... Qe8 White has 8. Re1 aiming for e4. After 8... Ne4 9 Nxe4 9... fxe4 10 Ng5 the horse is very aggressive. 10... d5 11 cxd5 11... exd5 and Black is losing material as 12 Qb3! Black can't play Qf7. 12... c6 13 Nxe4! 13... Qf7 14 Bg5! 14.. Bxg5 15 Nxg5 15... Qxf2 16 Kh1 White is ready for e4 next and he's winning. This line isn't very forced but if you play this wanting a kingside attack then you can see it will never happen against a prepared player. the Classical is the worst Dutch of them all
The Dutch is awesome. It's roughly as refuted objectively as the KID, but at least at my level white players have decent prep in the KID and hardly any prep in the Dutch. Here's a game to show it's potency at even the highest level.