Dutch Leningrad Defense


I’ve been experimenting with this new, recently developed opening within the Dutch defense which I have been trying lately. The first game I used it was against Fr. Kimel. He’s really good and knows what he’s doing. If you’ll take notes, you will see a prime reason why, against Fr. Kimel, I got my teeth kicked (this recent game, he’s playing the Sicilian dragon against me and wouldn’t take the pawn immediately so the next time, I will force the exchange on him 😉 !). It’s not because the system is unsound at all (if you don’t mind exposing your king to attack on move 1) but rather because a move I didn’t make in my game against Fr. Kimel which I actually made in a couple of games against two other people today.

The Dutch defense was first advocated by man named Elias Stein as a response to white’s opening of 1. d4 (The Oxford Companion to Chess–where all the following information comes from so will only cite pages from this point forward–, 118). It is still used by many grandmasters today including Magnus Carlsen and Hikaru Nakamura. It has a weakness to second moves of white such as 2. e4 and 2. Bg5 (preventing black from his second move of Nf6). I’ve had marginal success with the Dutch stonewall defense so I would argue that the Dutch defense is sound against white’s 1. d4 but these major weaknesses need to be taken into account before playing it. The Dutch defense starts off with 1. d4 f5!?. Any way, the Leningrad system in the Dutch defense was developed by three Russian men–one was an historian–Nikolai Georgyevich Kopylov, Yevgeny Filipovich Kuzminikh, and the professor of history, Kirill Vinogradov (222). All three men are from Leningrad, now known as Petrograd or St. Petersburg Russia. The opening combines the king’s Indian defense with the Dutch defense. Black’s goal is to fiancetto his bishop on the king-side and the defense provides greater mobility for black’s bishops than does any other variant of the Dutch defense. I generally have to navigate my queen-side bishop around the queen in the Dutch stonewall. The opening was made popular by GM Victor Korchnoi. It’s a solid opening but I had never used it before until that match with Fr. Kimel. I now know for the future how to play it. I think it’s quite a solid opening for black in response to 1. d4.

I lost to Fr. Kimel in our rematch in twenty moves. Fr. Kimel takes a lot of preparation. He doesn’t immediately take a piece when it can be taken but waits, analyzes the situation, etc. It’s what solid players do. It’s only when you forfeit your position that he attacks. So I’m in the middle of a third game with him too that he’ll probably win as well but the importance for me is not winning (especially when playing against a solid player) but in putting up a fight and growing in relationship.

Here is the moves made in my game against Fr. Kimel:
1. d4 f5 2. e3 Nf6 3. Bd3 g6 4. f4 Bg7 5. Nf3 0-0 6. 0-0 d6 7. c3 Be6 8. Nd2 Nd7 9. e4 f5xe4 10. Nxe4 Nxe4 11. Bxe4 Rxf4?? 12. Bxf4 Nf6 13. Re1 Qd7 14. Qe2 Bh3 15. Ng5 (probably just should’ve taken the pawn at that point for Qd5+, oh wait, there’s a move I forgot to make a while back…:oops:) Bg4 16. Bf3 Bf5 17. Qxe7 (which, had I made the right move a while back would not have happened!) Qbf 18. Qf7+! Kh8 19. Re7!! Qxb2?? 20. Qxg7#!! 1-0

Now, in the next two games, I will highlight the move I made which led to a much better position for black and an eventual win. The first game was more of the book moves in the Dutch Leningrad system. The second game, the person challenges me quite frequently online and she (I’m assuming) always plays as white and uses the stonewall attack. Again, the Dutch Leningrad system, I believe, is a sound defense against queen’s pawn games (especially the stonewall attack) if the right move is played. I will bold the right move I make.

Position after 7. ... e5!

Position after 7. … e5!

Game one with username MarcN (rematch after an epic loss I had in which my attempt at the Fried liver was busted):
1. d4 f5 2. c4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Bf4 Bg7 5. Nf3 0-0 6. e3 d6 7. Bd3 e5! 8. 0-0? e5xf4! 9. e3xf4 Nc6 10. d5 Nb4 11. a3 Na6 12. b4 Bd7 13. Re1 Ne4! 14. Nxe4 f5xe4! (it’s possible to take the rook on the queen-side but this forces the opponent to make a decision about whether to save the rook or keep his king-side protectors–he chooses the latter) 15. Rxe4 Bxa1! 16. Qxa1 Re8 (time to exchange some pieces) 17. Rxe8+ Qxe8 (black is up a rook) 18. Ng5 Qe7 19. h3 Re8 (time to get queens off the board) 20. Nf3 Bf5 (opponent won’t let me so we’ll settle for a bishop exchange) 21. Bxf5 g6xf5 22. b5 Nc5 23. c4 Nb3! 24. Qd1 Nc5 25. a5 Ne4 26. Qe1 Nc5 27. Qxe7 Rxe7 28. Ng5 Ne4 29. Ne6 Nc5 30. Nxc7?? Rxc7 31. g4 f5xg4 32. h3xg4 Ne4 33. f3 Ng3 34. f5 Rxc4 35. Kg2 Nxf5 36. g4xf5 Rf4 37. Kg3 Rxf5 38. Kg4 Rxd5 39. f4 Rxb5 40. f5 Rxa5 41. Kg5 Kf7 42. Kg4 b5 43. Kg5 b4 44. Kg4 b3 45. Kf4 b2 46. Kg5 b1=Q 0-1 (white resigned)–I never even had my opponent in check that game ironically…a 46 move game in which one player was in check once and that player was actually the winner? WOW! That goes for the records. Thank you, usernmae MarcN for that experience!

position after 10. ... e5!

Position after 10. … e5!

Game two with username Calee (the one I think is probably a girl–IDK–she uses the stonewall attack much like Fr. Kimel):
1. d4 f5 2. e3 Nf6 3. Bd3 g6 4. h3 Bg7 5. a3 0-0 6. c3 d6 7. b4 Be6? 8. Nd2 Nd7 9. Nf3 Bd5! 10. 0-0 e5! 11. d4xe5 d6xe5 12. Nxe5? Nxe5! 13. Be2 (critical moment in game…what would you do if you had black pieces would you play…) Bxg2!? (congratulations, because that’s the play I made so…what else but to take the bishop? otherwise, it takes the rook or retreats) 14. Kxg2 Qd5+ 15. Bf3 Nxf3 16. Qxf3 Ne4! 17. Nxe4 Qxe4 18. Qxe4 f5xe4 (after all of the madness of exchanging pieces, there is no material advantage but black has a far superior positional advantage…also, black king is safe, white king is not) 19. Bb2 Rf5 20. Rfd1 Rg5+ 21. Kh2 Rf8 22. Rf1 Rf3 23. Rad1 Rh5 24. Rd8+ Bf8 25. c4 Rxh3+ 26. Kg2 Rh5 27. Rg1 Rf5+ 28. Kf1 Rxg1+ 29. Kxf1 h5 30. Be5 h4 31. Bf4 h3 32. Re8 Kf7 33. Rxe4 Bd6 34. Bxd6 c7xd6 35. Rf4+ Rxf4 36. e3xf4 Kf6 37. Kh2 Kf5 38. Kxh3 Kxf4 39. Kg2 Ke4 40. f3+ Kd4 41. c5 d6xc5 42. b4xc5 Kxc5 43. f4 Kc4 44. Kg3 Kb3 45. Kg4 Kxa3! 46. Kg5 b5 47. Kxg6 b4 48. f5 b3 49. f6 b2 50. f7 b1=Q+!! 51. Kg7 Qf1! 52. Kf8 Qxf7+!! 53. Kxf7 a5 0-1 (white resigns)

Position after 20. Qxg7#!!

Position after 20. Qxg7#!! e5 would have prevented this…tsk, tsk, tsk!

So I have confidence that I can definitely beat Fr. Kimel especially witht the Dutch Leningrad, however, I need to remember to play e5! Basically, the move e5! in the Dutch Leningrad system prevents this from happening to the person with black pieces…

I personally think Fr. Kimel is actually better at chess than he says he is though. But I think he’s happier just being able to have someone to play with in the first place so there’s a relationship there which is what’s most important!

Advertisements

About newenglandsun

A student. Male. Passionate. Easily offended. Child-like wonderer. Growing in faith, messing up daily.
This entry was posted in Chess. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s