Nakamura used it in the World Cup last month and got eliminated.
Is The Stonewall Attack for only beginners?
Sort:
Didnt Nakamura get eliminated because he didnt accept a draw and wanted to play for a win or was that a different event??
PhoenixTTD wrote:
Nakamura used it in the World Cup last month and got eliminated.
Wow! That guy Hikaru is sure crazy, and I like him alot!
Would you rather play 1.e4 with a bunch of variations to be studied(caro kan, sicilian, alekhine etc.) or (one opening always) the stonewall when u always play it as white? (its like a tornado).
judging from his bullet games i believe nakamura knows like million openings.
TetsuoShima wrote:
Didnt Nakamura get eliminated because he didnt accept a draw and wanted to play for a win or was that a different event??
I don't think he was offered a draw, but he said he had a clearly drawing strategy but overestimated his chances, played for a win and lost.
I use stonewall all the time and have great results. The key is you need to morph into other openings based on blacks response. Used in combination with Colle and Torre you have yourself a lethal reporierre
Sep 8, 2013
0
#8
Didn't Aronian play it in the Candidates, against Ivanchuk, perhaps? Someone played it, I'm sure.
I don't play it much anymore, but I think it's a great system to know. If someone plays it against me, I know it, inside out, and since there's not a lot to know about it, I can almost guarantee I know it at least as well as they do. Sometimes when surprised with an opening, the Stonewall is there as a transposition option, and that's nice to have to fall back on, too.
The same ideas can also be flipped horizontally, which I've used before now when an opponent played g3 against my Sicilian, drummed up a fair bit of pressure, and I wanted to lock it all down (so I did, with pawns on c5, d6, e5, then f6, and piece play mobilized as per Stonewall, just the other way around, having castled long).
So yeah, good stuff to know, even if there is merit to knowing more objectively strong openings.
it's used but carefully the last person who tried it ended up blocking his position up and i checkmated him after we only swapped a few pieces
Sep 8, 2013
0
#10
Well, yes, I'm pretty sure any opening can be played badly. It probably takes more talent to play the Stonewall badly than some more complex opening, though.
I have a fair bit of playing experience with the Stonewall attack from my previous chess life. I discovered it in Horowitz & Reinfields book “How to improve your chess” They proposed a system for lower intermediate players where you learned 3 openings. The Stonewall attack as white & the Grunfeld & Sicilian Dragon as black.
I adopted the system for a while & played the Stonewall almost exclusively & had a lot of success with it both OTB & in Correspondence (Snail mail back then). Most people will agree that if black doesn't know how to defend it it can be devastating & if you like sacrifices & huge Kingside attacks early in the game it suits that style.
The basic theory is pretty sound, take a solid defence & turn it into an attack as white with 1 move in hand.
As I have recently started playing it again to teach my daughter it was only natural to have another look at it. The main problem I had with it was when black played a fianchetto defence against it. Horowitz failed to mention anything about a Kingside fianchetto in the book & thats where I really struggled but only against top quality opposition.
So I found some good stuff online that completed Horowitz's omission in the book. Against the Kingside fianchetto or if black plays Bc5 you need to know how to transpose into a Queens gambit style opening. I wish I'd had that info years ago.
As some ppl have suggested the Stonewall occasionally rears its head at higher levels with mixed results today. My personal opinion is that it will struggle against opponents rated 2,000 & up & if you are also at 2,000 you won't be playing it exclusively, you will have a well rounded repertoire of openings yourself.
So I would say use it but not to the exclusion of all other openings & as far as top level play goes we can only watch & see what happens.
It is of interest that it was very successful against computers for a time because the positions lacked clear tactical lines that the computer could calculate against.
Sep 9, 2013
0
#12
This is the game you were talking about:
And as usual in that tournament, he had troubles with time management during all the game, and in the end lost on time.
Even 'super experienced' players loose to this opening. I'm an intermediate player. As you can hear, The 'stonewall' attack{or dutch defense} Is it really for only beginners???