Black's 1...f5 stakes a claim to the e4-square and envisions an attack in themiddlegame on White'skingside; however, it also weakens Black's kingside to some extent, especially on the e8–h5 diagonal.[1] Like its 1.e4 counterpart, theSicilian Defence, the Dutch is an aggressive and unbalancing opening, resulting in the lowest percentage of draws among the most common replies to 1.d4.[2] Historically, White has tried many methods to exploit the kingside weaknesses, such as theStaunton Gambit (2.e4) and Korchnoi Attack (2.h3 and 3.g4).
Elias Stein (1748–1812), anAlsatian who settled inThe Hague, recommended the defence as the best reply to 1.d4 in his 1789 bookNouvel essai sur le Jeu des échecs, avec des réflexions militaires relatives à ce jeu.[4]
The Stonewall Dutch enjoyed a resurgence of interest in the 1980s and 1990s, when leadinggrandmasters (GMs)Artur Yusupov,Sergey Dolmatov,Nigel Short, andSimen Agdestein helped develop the system where Black plays an earlier ...d5 and places his dark-squared bishop on d6.[6] This setup, termed the Modern Stonewall, has remained more popular than the traditional early ...Be7.
White most oftenfianchettoes the king's bishop with g3 and Bg2. Black also sometimes fianchettoes the king's bishop with ...g6 and ...Bg7 (the Leningrad Dutch), but may insteaddevelop the bishop to e7, d6 (after ...d5), or b4 (the latter is most often seen if White plays c4 beforecastling). Play often runs 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 e6 4.Nf3 (4.Nh3!? is also possible, intending Nf4–d3 to control the e5-square) 4...Be7 5.0-0 0-0 6.c4 and now Black chooses between 6...d5 (the characteristic move of the Stonewall), 6...d6, the Ilyin–Zhenevsky Variation (less popular today), or Alekhine's move 6...Ne4!? retaining the option of moving the d-pawn either one or two squares.
In the Leningrad Variation of the Dutch Defence, Black fianchettos the dark-squared bishop. From g7, this bishop will not only be a good defender of the king, but also an active piece on thelong diagonal.
The game may proceed 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.Nc3 0-0 6.Nf3 d6 7.0-0 Qe8. The g2-bishop helps protect White's king against Black's possible kingside aggression, and this bishop would possibly be blunted by the f5-pawn if it were instead to develop to d3.
The opening code for the Leningrad Variation in the Dutch Defence is A87 to A89 in theEncyclopaedia of Chess Openings (ECO) classification system:
In the Stonewall Dutch, Black plays ...d5 in the opening and secures a tight grip of the e4-square. A possible example is 1.d4 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 e6 4.Nf3 d5 5.c4 c6.
TheECO codes for the Stonewall Variation of the Dutch Defence are A90 to A92:
An aggressive attempt by White to sacrifice a pawn with 2.e4!? in exchange for rapid development and attacking chances against Black's Dutch setup. Named afterHoward Staunton, who introduced it in his match againstBernhard Horwitz.[10][11] The Staunton Gambit was once a feared attacking line,[12] but it has been out of favour for over 80 years.[13]GMLarry Christiansen andInternational MasterJeremy Silman have opined that it "offers White equality at best".[14]
TheECO code for the Staunton Gambit in the Dutch Defence is A83.
Position after 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.0-0 0-0 6.c4 d6
The traditionalmove order involves White playing 2.c4. More commonly, White will start with 2.g3. Some common variations are: c4 is played after g3 and Bg2; c4 is played after Nf3; and c4 is played after 0-0.
2.h3 followed by 3.g4,Carl Mayet introduced this completely different gambit approach to the Dutch in 1839 againstvon der Lasa.[15] Von der Lasa later published analysis of this line in the first edition of theHandbuch des Schachspiels.[16][17]Viktor Korchnoi, one of the world's leading players, reintroduced the line into tournament practice in Korchnoi–Känel,Biel 1979.[18] GM Christiansen later concluded, as von der Lasa and Staunton had done over 140 years earlier, that Black could get a good game by declining the gambit with 2...Nf6 3.g4 d5![19]
2.Qd3, the Alapin Variation
Black sometimes starts with the move order 1...e6 to avoid these lines, although Black must then be ready to play theFrench Defence if White continues 2.e4, rendering the Dutch no longer an option. The Staunton Gambit remains a good choice of opening for White in blitz tournaments where Black has little time to ponder the most accurate defence.
^Stein, Elias (1789).Nouvel Essai sur le Jeu des Échecs: avec des Reflexions Militaires Relatives à ce Jeu [New Essay on the Game of Chess, with Military Reflections Regarding This Game] (in French). La Haye, France: (Self-published). pp. 114–115. The Dutch Defence is presented on p. 114:"Dix-huitieme Partie. Celui qui n'a pas laTrait ne veut pas recevoir leGambit de laDame. 1. B. Le P. de la D. 2 pas. N. Le P. du F. du R. 2 pas (a). 2. B. Le P. du F. de la D. 2 pas. N. Le C. du R. à la 3me case de son F." (18th Game. He who does not have theTreatise does not want to get theQueen's Gambit. 1. White: the Queen's pawn advances 2 squares; Black: the King's bishop pawn advances 2 squares (a) 2. White: the Queen's bishop pawn advances 2 squares; Black: The King's knight advances to the third square, in front of his [i.e., the King's] bishop.) From p. 115:"(a) On a déja vu que, quand on ne veut pas recevoir leGambit duRoi, on doit pousser, au second coup, lepion de laDame deux pas. De même vous devez observer que, lorsque votre adversaire commence par débuter au premier coup en poussant sonpion de laDame, deux pas, vous ne pouvez mieux faire que de pousser lepion duFou duRoi deux pas." ( (a) One has already seen that when one does not want to get theKing's Gambit, one should push, on the second move, theQueen's pawn two squares. Likewise, you should note that when your opponent begins on the first move by pushing hisQueen's pawn two squares, you cannot do better than to push yourKing's bishop pawn two squares.)
^In 1939, Fine wrote that, "The Staunton Gambit ... offers White considerable attacking chances."Fine, R.;Griffith, R.C.;White, J.H. (1939).Modern Chess Openings, 6th edition. David McKay. p. 176. In 1964, Horowitz wrote that the Staunton Gambit gives White "sharp attacking chances for his Pawn" and places the opponent at a psychological disadvantage by requiring Black to renounce his aggressive intentions and "resign himself to an accurate and stubborn defense".Horowitz, I.A. (1964).Chess Openings: Theory and Practice. Simon and Schuster. p. 611. More recent writers have observed that fear of the Staunton Gambit has discouraged many players from using the Dutch. Yet many have used it anywayChristiansen, L.;Silman, J. (1989).The Dutch Defense. Chess Digest. p. 192.ISBN0-87568-178-6.;Schiller, E.; Bill Colias (1993).How to Play Black Against the Staunton Gambit. Chess Digest. p. 4.ISBN0-87568-236-7.
^In 1925, the editors of the Fourth Edition ofModern Chess Openings (MCO-4) wrote that the Staunton Gambit "has fallen out of favour for no clear reason".Griffith, R.C.;White, J.H. and M.E. Goldstein (1925).Modern Chess Openings, 4th edition. Whitehead & Miller. p. 120. In 1939, Fine wrote inMCO-6, "The Staunton Gambit fell out of favour some time ago and still remains so ... ."Fine, R.;Griffith, R.C.;White, J.H. (1939).Modern Chess Openings, 6th edition. David McKay. p. 176. GMNick de Firmian writes inMCO-15 (2008) that the Staunton Gambit "is not in much favor today".de Firmian, N. (2008).Modern Chess Openings, 15th edition. Random House. p. 494.ISBN978-0-8129-3682-7.
