Try the Stonewall Attack, Thank me later

Hey there! 

I have played thousands and thousands of games with the stonewall and I play it OTB (1760 FIDE rated currently) , so much so that I have practically mastered it and play it on instinct now. Its an incredibly underrated opening that goes against the normal chess rules by pushing the F pawn to secure the center in exchange for weakening your king. People in the 1900 and 2000s struggle to play against it. Try it out. Here is one of my recent games. The engine doesn't like when you play the stonewall since you are pushing the F pawn which is rarely a good move. But who cares about the engine when you play it against humans.

+1

I'm mid 1800s over on Lichess... Same here

I incorporated 1.d4 2. e3 & 3. Be3 into my repertoire. (Because I'm a Colle Koltanowski neophyte... they go to gether like peanut butter and jelly)

The Stonewall attack is Very underrated... There is a plethora of old school theory built off 1.d4 2. e3 & 3. Be3

GM Andrew Solits' Book The Stonewall Attack and..... I.A Horowitz & Fred Reinfeld's "How to Think Ahead in Chess" really got me into the Stonewall Attack.

Once you get used to working with the stonewall pawn formation, the static nature of it becomes a strength.

@pcalugaru

That was a good stonewall game. The only thing I would point out from my experience is that placing your knight on d2 to prevent enemy knight from jumping middle is more prio than castling. Especially when there is no current immediate risk to your king. Great stuff otherwise! Glad to find a stonewall enjoyer

I take it you meant 3. Bd3 since the pawn is already there? Is the e4 pawn break a common motif? Any other tips on this opening?

Too easy for your opponent if they remotely know what they are doing too lock the middle, lock the flanks, get that draw.

vs the relatively simple setup with d5, c5, knights on f6 and c6 and Bg4, White has a hard time to fight for equality and it is not really that hard for black to play. sometimes the bishop is exchanged on f5 clamping down with Re8 etc. quite comfy for black imo but tastes are different ofc

@IDUNNOWHY4

Its not that simple really. People in my rating are struggling against it. I have beaten 1900s OTB with it. Give it a try

@Ze_Shoopuf

This position is exactly what I would like to reach in a stonewall. What i struggle most against is usually a good kings indian player who knows deep theory.

Also yes you can try stonewall defense, but sometimes the oppoenent will force you into a French and thats the only comcern.

@woodpusherinc

Yes, when opponent closes the position you almost always push E pawn.

I agree its not that simple and my tastes are different...

A Reverse Noteboom or a Reverse QGA (kind of has both elements ) Black is equal according to the FISH... Yet... White's plan is simple... he will hold on to the extra pawn, make black work to take it back, while developing. Lots of scope and play in the positions. I booked up on the early dxc5 knowing after 1.d4 2. e3 & 3. Bd3 people will look to play your recipe.. I've only lost once...by a superior player who probably played the Noteboom defense. Regardless... it's safe bet.. Black looking to play the setup with d5, c5, knights on f6 and c6 and Bg4, is hardly going to expect winding up in a Colors Reversed Noteboom.

The Stonewall Attack...

https://www.chess.com/blog/RussBell/stonewall-attack

Give us all break... I can see offering a line with some analysis , then some advice .... Your post was just what happens when you stand behind a cow...

The Stonewall attack is quite worse than the Stonewall defense, despite the extra tempo.

The reason is that Black has not committed himself yet to either ...g6 or ...e6, so he can develop the LSB to g4/f5 before playing ...e6 and enjoy a healthy positional advantage.

@pfren

I have never played the stonewall in the 2400s in rapid, perhaps everyone there will be able to counter the stonewall with ease as you are saying.

From my experience from the thousand of games I have played The stonewall is a great way for 1000s to reach 1800s. I maintained a solid winrate against 1800s-2200s with the stonewall.

Im pretty sure the games will be much more difficult when I reach 2400 and the stonewall will become extremely hard to use. But this isnt the point of this post.

I highly recommend anyone below 1500s to try it out! Thanks

After you drop the original post... this thread turned into the preverbal Chess 20/20 hindsight. That always makes my eyes roll...

****Too easy for your opponent if they remotely know what they are doing. (I wonder if he looked at the lines I play when someone rolls out the typical recipe?) Not original on my part... GM Soltis cites those line in his "The Stonewall Attack"

****You played a garbage opening against a garbage opponent. Wrote by a person who's attitude isn't so Glamorous... and... is it me? That profile looks fake as F7#K!! (Someone might want to look into that)

(as always) Pfren post was legit. i.e. but it's pointing to theoretical advantages.

IMO (and I'm a nobody....) The Practical Advantage has a lot of weight here. The pawn formation leads to themes that White can predict and book up on... With a classical set up (non fianchetto pawn formation) White if they know what they are doing can create chances on the queenside even with a bishop at or pawn at f5. (ideas like exchanging dxc5 and putting a knight on d4 and attacking with the pawns on the queenside. Even if Black fianchetto's kingside, White can play on the a3-f8 diagonal, if black in unaware of the typical plans, White can create chances.

It's easy to be sitting at a desk top with an engine and cite XYZ, on the internet. Encountering any opening over the board, or on the internet (if your playing legit) that you rarely see, and the opponent specializes in it.... that's a practical advantage.

No matter how we slice it 90% of us are not going to have a tile in front of our name... pretty much means most opening are legit to us... realizing that .. well that's when chess got fun for me.

The one and only way to reach 1800 from 1000 is not blundering stuff, and being able to spot your opponents blunders (won't include cheating, for obvious reasons). Thinking that the opening (ANY opening) has ANY relation to your rating rise, is placebo.