Response to d4 for an e4 player

I play 1.E4 and feel my sharpest in a tactical game. For as long as I’ve played chess, I’ve struggled against the positions that arise out of 1.d4. So much so that I’ve taken to doing what Simon Williams does abs playing 1..e6 to give my opponent the opportunity to play 2.e4 and transpose into the French which I am quite comfortable playing. Sometimes it works sometimes it doesn’t. When they don’t transpose I play the Dutch, and I’ve had mixed results and never feel like I have a good control or understanding of the position like I do with e4 openings on both sides. Any suggestions on openings I could look into that would fit my style and current repertoire or other suggestions on how to feel more comfortable in more positional openings. I know a good player needs to able to play both but I just can’t seem to get there. Thanks

You named exactly what I do as Black.

I suggest you order the book "Win With the Stonewall Dutch", published by Gambit (www.gambitbooks.com - search the full list of books for Stonewall, and there should be links to Amazon for that product).

The book is a little older - 2008 - and while some better 14th move in some random line may have been found, this book is excellent at explaining the ins and outs of the opening. Move order factors. When not to play a Stonewall- there are times when it is bad - 64 complete games, exercises, and a theory section in each of the 12 chapters. You might not need to go through all 12 chapters. Might be able to get away with just the first 8 or 9. Chapters 10 and 11 deal with 2.Nc3, 2.Bg5, and gambits (2.g4, 2.e4). If you play 1...e6, you can skip these. 12 deals with 1.Nf3 and 1.c4. If you play 1...f5 against these, like I do, then this chapter should be read. If you play something else against, say, 1.c4, like 1...e5 or 1...c5, you can skip chapter 12 as well. For me it is 10 and 11 I skip. May go through the games just for general pattern stuff and tactics, but not the theory sections.

There are some cases, like early Nh3 lines, where he has you go with a Classical Dutch setup.

This is the Bible for non-Leningrad Dutch players!

@ThrillerFan I’ll look into it, thank you! I usually play the classical Dutch but the weak pawn on e6 is sometimes quite a problem. Do you find the stonewall still allows for tactical chances? I’ve always been told to steer away from it because of the frozen pawn structure.

Hi!

I think you can try 1.d4, e6 and if 2. c4, b6, the English Defense. It is quite sharp and interesting -I play it all the time. The critical variation would be 3. e4, Bb7, where Black plays in hypermodern way: Black allows White to occupy the centre and then he will counterattack there with piece play and pawn brakes.

Good luck!

Hi

I agree with @ThrillerFan , but you could consider a Dutch with bb5 either pinning a knight or giving a check.I’ve had good success with this line and it’s not that theoretical. You do have to memorise a few lines though.good luck!

Sorry I wrote bb5 it’s bb4.

That book will change your perspective.

There are often ...f4 breaks out of the blue for tactical reasons. Many queenside attacks that result from tactics. The Stonewall is not a one-dimentional opening like it was once thought back in the 1950s.

Actually, the critical variation and why I would never recommend the English Defense is 3.a3!

The problem for White is not Black's LSB, but rather his DSB!

I also hope you know that both the Classical and Stonewall should be last resorts, not your main goal. They should only be played when White has played g3.

1.d4 e6 2.c4 f5 3.Nc3 Nf6 and now

4.e3 b6! (4...d6?!, 4...d5?!)

4.Nf3 Bb4! (4...d6?!, 4...d5?? 5.Bf4!! Followed by 6.e3 and 7.Bd3 - they explain in the book that this structure cannot be allowed against the Stonewall. Like against the London, you play a b6 setup.

@ThrillerFan, thank you, I will definitely get the book and delve deeper. I do know the b6 setups for when white does not play g3, but can’t find many resources on it. Does the book cover that in much depth or do you have another resource for that. Chess.com always just says it’s the horowitz defense and I get no where with that information. Williams covered it briefly on his videos on the Dutch but without an explanation of middle game plans. The moves you have provided here however are helpful for that instance. I probably despise playing against the London the most. Thanks again.

Hi!

Opening choice is a matter of personal likes and dislikes. I recomend the English Defense because I like it and I think that due to the tactical style of OP and his repertoire it would suit his needs.

On the other hand, the English Defense is theoretically sound and is backed up by English GM's Keene, Stean, Miles, Speelman, Short and Adams -hence the name of the defense.

The 3. a3 variation is rather quite and positional so a tactical player might be on gard but 3...f5 is the main reply and gives Dutch type good play -something that might suit the OP too.

Good luck!

@maafernan thank you for the suggestion I’ll take a look as well, although keeping with the Dutch may be easier since I already play it and have done some studying on it. Should I decide to delve deeper in the English, do you have any reference suggestions?

Hi!

There is not much theory on the English Defense-compared to other more popular defenses. I made my way to it with ECO (Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings) code A40, and studying GM's games. I usually play 1...b6 as a "universal first pre-move" so I have a good experience with the English Defense gained after hundreds of games with quite good results.

Not exactly the same, but I also play a lot 1. b3 that could be seen as a reversed English opening. For that I wrote a post if you are interested you might check it out: https://www.chess.com/blog/maafernan/opening-repertoire-the-nimzowitsch-larsen-attack

Good luck!

They don't cover it in the sense of it having its own chapter. The chapters are grouped by what White does. So, for example, there is a chapter where White plays d4 and c4 without g3, and a chapter where White plays d4 and Nf3 without g3. With d4 and c4, it explains both 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 Bb4 and 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e3 b6 in the same chapter. Then, it will show 1.d4 e6 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bf4 Nf6 4.e3 b6 in the chapter with 1.d4/2.Nf3 without g3.

So does it cover the b6 lines? Yes, but not as a standalone chapter, like you wouldn't find all instances of ...b6 collected together in a single spot.

I recommend reading the book in sequence, at minimum chapters 1 to 9. Study 10 and 11 if you play 1...f5. Study 12 if you play the Dutch against 1.c4 and 1.Nf3.

I'm no Dutch expert, but from my limited understanding of it, I believe it's best to learn how to wield all three main variations (Classical, Stonewall, and Leningrad).

This way, you'll be capable of transposing to either of the three, depending on what the position calls for - as some structures work better, at times, than others.

It's okay to have a favorite setup, but don't allow favoritism to reduce your options. Becoming a three-headed monster is better than just one ...

1.d4, as black normally I want to play Dutch, but am also trying to learn Nimzo Indian, and even learn the Queens Gambit. But everyone is playing the London. I might get 50% of my black games as 1.e4 30% 1.d4. Of the 1.d4 games 90% of them are against London. So I just play non committal moves until it shows to be a London, then go to the system I want. Can't even get proper Dutch systems half the time as I have to wait till I know if it is Jobava or Classic London as it effects the queen side development.

Thanks all. I just played a game in the Dutch with 93% accuracy. I’ll figure it out over time. I appreciate everyone’s help!

Play cool