Stonewall = Handcuffed?

I've been playing chess just over a month and have progressed at what i believe is a rapid pace. Something has clicked in the past 4 days or so as im seeing the board better and competing and winning against players in the 1300+ range despite my 1100+ rating and I figured it was time to get into learning defences both for and against me and I've come across stonewall and dutch-stonewall and I see that they have good reputations and they fit into my rating/skill level and that of opponents...the little I've found about this/these is that I can do virtually nothing once the first four pawns are laid out regardless of the opponents moves...this is all without getting into an in- depth understanding of the root why's of their origin/reasons for their existence, etc...basically I don't want to read a book as sites have suggested and would rather not read pure stereo instructions/notions I would like prose in more human terms to maybe understand this OR ANY suggestions/opinions(on this defense or another style) as I feel I need to morph my current play into something more tested/true as I doubt at 33 I'm going to turn the chess world upside down with my bullet knights forking yer rook and king and turn this into the Dallas Defence that will be copied for years to come...thanks in advance for any help you may be able to offer-Matthew Marshall:)

Stonewall is basically a "what you see is what you get" defense.   On the positive side, you get a very solid formation, a safe king, and opportunities for counterplay which depend on the opponent.   On the downside, a huge hole on d5 and a terrible bishop (the light one).  

So it's an aggressive defense, but not a real mobile one.   There are certainly other Dutch variants that offer more interesting play with the same security (and often some of the same defects).  

As to the "reason" behind playing them, the idea of f5 is always to gain kingside space, usually allowing your opponent to play on the queenside.  It's a little bit like saying "Hey, you want THAT crappy queenside?  Have it.   I'm building over HERE on the important part."   

White, against f5, can play e4 as a gambit and it works really well to open things up, makes Black's position more passive than he might prefer.  

If on the other hand you seek a more active style of play, less positional sounding-out and more dynamic piece play, then any number of other defenses might be a better choice - Grunfeld, King's Indian, Queen's Gambit Accepted etc. 

It all depends on how you like to play. I would suggest as you are in the process of learning and improving that a more aggressive and open system would be both more enjoyable and beneficial. If you like to play f5 in response to d4 (the dutch) the point is to dominate the e4 square, hopefully put a knight there which cannot be chased away, and make an attack on the white kingside. This is however difficult to do if white knows what you are up to and takes precautions (he plays g3 and Bg2 early to guard the e4 square with the bishop and make his kingside more difficult to attack).

Hi Matt, I play the Stonewall Attack and the Dutch Defence all the time and do fairly well with them. I think part of the reason you may be having trouble is that with ANY opening, often due to the pawn structure, the same lines (opportunities and drawbacks) will show up, time and again. 

The point is you need to at least view some games to get the idea of how the system (generally) works when attacking Kingside and attacking Queenside or down the middle etc. There are certain traps that can be laid in both openings, and from playing more games of both openings, you will start to see those patterns show up time and again and then see the opportunities and threats.

Not that my games are fabulous chess masterpieces, but I invite you to view my games archive in chess.com; you'll find lots of Stonewall, Dutch and Caro-Kann games to have a look at.

Or go to www.chessgames.com and search for those openings played by GMs; run through them. Some of the games there may be fairly advanced stuff, but that's the tip top level of play to be found.

I believe Unmaster is fairly accurately describing the tone of play with those openings, they are good solid beginning openings because they are somewhat paint-by-numbers to learn. Once you get those down, then try a few more, you may hit on some that suit your 'style' better.

Me, I disliked my N being pinned when playing black with the Ruy Lopez; that wasn't for me, ditched that one and tried the French, but didn't like the buried light square B. I found the Caro-Kann, I like the flank opening twist about it and it wasn't enormous to learn like the Sicilan; too big for me. 

Thanks for replies/help, I will certainly take the advice of bunny(sweet name:) and view games w these openings, and master I like your quotes about "have the crappy side" that's EXACTLY what I meant when I said I wanted things in human terms, the knowing pawn placements and those quotes are as valuable as any of the "in-depth" analysis or videos I've come across...speaking of analysis, I just learned how to use the sites analysis feature and first thing I noticed is that it tells my I'm playing Sicilian closed every time(not in games trying Dutch/stonewall) I dunno if that's actually right so whatever, anyways I tend to play e5/e4, support that pawn w the knight, usually swing the bishop wide attacking king/queen and support the bishop w h/a pawn, send second support up the middle w pawn to 3rd rank, then bring out my other knight mirroring the other, and usually swinging the other bishop across the board to the 5th rank w the other, now it's a very symmetrical attack/style to begin w and doesn't yet attack either k it q side but all of this varies based on what I'm allowed to do by opposition and from there I lead a knight to kingside and leave a bishop q side lurking...now this amateur style/description leads me to ask if I should find something that supports this in a variation of another style/defense/etc, I wouldn't begin to know how to do this or has the computer already told me I'm playing Sicilian? Cuz I do think the way I've been playing had potential in its essence w tweaks at my skill level or am I that ignorant?(I know I am, just not sure about this particular instance) basically wondering if I should ditch this generic, made up, default play regardless of results in the idea that the goal is to get better and I might as well start now...long winded enough???

Hmm... if the computer says you are playing a sicilian, you aren't seeing a stonewall at all.  

Here is the stonewall, roughly.   It is a description of black's pawn structure in response to 1.d4 or 1.c4 usually.  

Whereas Sicilian is the response of ...., c5 from black to white's e4.   Typical position might be something like this:

These are completely different in nature. 

So... what are you actually playing, or playing against?

Ok that helps, now what I meant was that previously in games before trying dutch or stonewall it was telling me Sicilian. Now sir, see if u. Can reread and interpret what is said and about the idea of new system or working w the Sicilian...thx buddy

As white, utilizing the stonewall attack, colle system or torre attack will unleash a very lethal reporierre. Andrew soltis book is a great place to start.

Okay, yeah I looked back through some of your games and you are/were playing closed Sicilian positions, which is to say that when you play e4 and your opponent plays c5, you are playing d3 rather than d4 which would force things to open up a bit.   So there's a number of approaches that are kind of fun.   Keeping it closed, with d3 played, as white you can try playing f4 and dominating the kingside (this is actually almost a Dutch idea).  It's a VERY old idea and well out of favor these days, which means that a lot of sicilian players have no idea what to do against it.  You must castle short pretty fast or you'll get eaten.   Another idea is to play b4 against the c5 pawn as a gambit.   If accepted you can play a3 hoping to get your bishop out on a3 if he takes.   Or you can play d4 and control the center completely.    This is probably not a sound gambit but fun.  

Back to defending, if you are playing dutch, the system I've had the most luck with is actually Old Dutch (which I think also bears the name of a Russian now).   D5 is not played, in favor of d6, and hoping for an early e pawn push.   

In many Dutch setups, Qe8 after 0-0 protects the under-manned light squares on the kingside (they are weak especially if you play h6), and it gives the c knight a square to get to if he goes out and is driven back....  handy move anyhow.   

This will transpose to a stonewall if you like, or you can in some cases fianchetto the queen bishop successfully.   But the hope or focus here is often to get the e pawn one more step and really blast the middle open.  

Search out "Grand Prix Sicilian" for the modern treatments of the f4 push with white.  It's a fun variant.