Dutch Defence

The Dutch Defence has a character all of its own in contrast to other 1.d4 openings, which often share similar themes. Black usually plays variously for:

• A Classical setup with 2...e6 3...d6 4...Be7,
• A Stonewall with 2...e6 3...d5 4...c6, or
• The Leningrad with 2...g6 3...Bg7 4...d6.

White usually plays 2. g3 or 2. c4 here, though many moves are playable.

One interesting though often considered dubious option is the Staunton Gambit with 2. e4, leading to more tactical positions than the positional grinds and straightforward attacks that the Dutch usually provides.

Because Black responds to 1.d4 with f5, breaking the symmetry, the Dutch is an example of a Semi-Closed Game. This means one player, but not both, has a fixed pawn in the center which implies that the center will be somewhat (but not completely) closed. The main purpose of the f5 push is to take control of the e4 square. The idea behind f5, typically followed by Nf6, is to prevent white from playing e4. However, white has several options that allow them to play e4 anyway. One way to achieve this is the Staunton Gambit where the move is simply played immediately. The Bladel Variation and the Raphael Variation are more sophisticated ways of playing e4. In most of these lines white plays Nc3 followed by e4.

Short version: in Elias Stein’s 1789 Nouvel essai sur le jeu des échecs, the Dutch Defence^[1] is explicitly recommended as Black’s best reply to 1.d4. He frames it as the choice “for the player who doesn’t want to accept the Queen’s Gambit,” and gives the starting moves 1.d4 f5 with notes explaining the idea and typical follow-up. (Internet Archive+1) What Stein actually writes:
He introduces the line under “Dix-huitième Partie. Celui qui n’a pas le Trait ne veut pas recevoir le Gambit de la Dame.” and starts:

• 1. B. Le P. de la D. 2 pas (1.d4) — N. Le P. du F. du R. 2 pas (…f5);
• 2. B. Le P. du F. de la D. 2 pas (2.c4) — N. Le C. du R. à la 3me case de son F. (…Nf6);
• 3. B. Le C. de la D. à la 3me case de son F. (Nc3) — N. Le P. de la D. 1 pas (…d6);
  
  etc. In his note (a) he states the core recommendation (emphasis added):“…vous ne pouvez mieux faire que de pousser le pion du Fou du Roi deux pas.” (i.e., play …f5). In note (c) he explains a common plan: placing the queen so that Black can play the king’s pawn two squares next (…e5), clarifying that the queen’s placement shouldn’t hinder the pieces/pawns. Why this mattersBecause Stein was writing in The Hague and promoted …f5 vs 1.d4 as the reply, his book is widely cited as the historical origin of the Dutch Defence’s name and concept.

The Dutch Defence in chess has been advocated by several notable players throughout history. Elias Stein^[2], an Alsatian who settled in The Hague, recommended the defence as the best reply to 1.d4 in his 1789 book Nouvel essai sur le Jeu des échecs, avec des réflexions militaires relatives à ce jeu Later, prominent players such as Alexander Alekhine^[3], Bent Larsen^[4][5][6], Paul Morphy^[7][8][9], Miguel Najdorf aka Mieczysław Najdorf^[10][11], Simon Williams^[12][13], and Hikaru Nakamura aka 中村 光 ^[14][15][16] have used the Dutch Defence with success Notably, the Dutch Defence was prominently used in the 1951 World Championship match between Mikhail Botvinnik and David Bronstein Additionally, the Stonewall Dutch, a variation of the Dutch Defence, was popularized in the 1980s and 1990s by grandmasters like Artur Yusupov, Sergey Dolmatov, Nigel Short, and Simen Agdestein Magnus Carlsen has also used the Stonewall variation to achieve notable victories.

The Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings^[17] has twenty codes for the Dutch Defence, A80 through A99. This is telling, that the Dutch leads to complex and rich positions.

• A80: 1.d4 f5
• A81: 1.d4 f5 2.g3 (Fianchetto Attack)
• A82: 1.d4 f5 2.e4 (Staunton Gambit)
• A83: 1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 (Staunton Gambit)
• A84: 1.d4 f5 2.c4
• A85: 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 (Rubinstein Variation)
• A86: 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.g3 (Fianchetto Variation)
• A87: 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.Nf3 (Leningrad Dutch)
• A88: 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.Nf3 0-0 6.0-0 d6 7.Nc3 c6 (Leningrad Dutch, Warsaw Variation)
• A89: 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.Nf3 0-0 6.0-0 d6 7.Nc3 Nc6 (Leningrad Dutch, Matulovich)
• A90: 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.g3 e6 4.Bg2 (Classical Variation)
• A91: 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.g3 e6 4.Bg2 Be7
• A92: 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.g3 e6 4.Bg2 Be7 5.Nf3 0-0
• A93: 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.g3 e6 4.Bg2 Be7 5.Nf3 0-0 6.0-0 d5 7.b3 (Botvinnik Variation)
• A94: 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.g3 e6 4.Bg2 Be7 5.Nf3 0-0 6.0-0 d5 7.b3 c6 8.Ba3 (Stonewall)
• A95: 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.g3 e6 4.Bg2 Be7 5.Nf3 0-0 6.0-0 d5 7.Nc3 c6 (Stonewall)
• A96: 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.g3 e6 4.Bg2 Be7 5.Nf3 0-0 6.0-0 d6
• A97: 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.g3 e6 4.Bg2 Be7 5.Nf3 0-0 6.0-0 d6 7.Nc3 Qe8 (Ilyin–Genevsky Variation)
• A98: 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.g3 e6 4.Bg2 Be7 5.Nf3 0-0 6.0-0 d6 7.Nc3 Qe8 8.Qc2 (Ilyin–Genevsky Variation)
• A99: 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.g3 e6 4.Bg2 Be7 5.Nf3 0-0 6.0-0 d6 7.Nc3 Qe8 8.b3 (Ilyin–Genevsky Variation)

Approximate chances

White win 36%, Draw 42.1%, Black win 29.1%.^[18]

1. d4 f5

For explanation of theory tables, see theory table and for notation, see algebraic notation.

When contributing to this Wikibook, please follow the Conventions for organization.

Wikipedia has related information at Dutch Defence

• Nunn's Chess Openings. 1999. John Nunn (Editor), Graham Burgess, John Emms, Joe Gallagher. ISBN 1-8574-4221-0.

• Kasparov, Garry, & Keene, Raymond 1989 Batsford chess openings 2. ISBN 0-8050-3409-9.