en.lichess.org/bywzf6qZ/
I have less experience playing against the Dutch than I do some other openings (and I've been learning the London, so it's relatively new to me too), so it was good to get a chance to play against it, and I was hoping some players with more experience against the Dutch could help me learn from it.
My own thoughts:
I thought I came out of the opening without much advantage but OK. One thing I have since learned is that playing the London System against the Dutch, developing your light-square bishop to c4 early can be useful if it can help you disrupt castling. Otherwise it probably would have made more sense to develop it to e2, since the thematic bishop sacrifices of the London to open up the kingside are not going to work in a pawn structure like this.
It's likely I should have castled kingside, and earlier than I did castle. My idea was I wanted to mount a kingside attack with my pawns and rooks and queen, which never came close to materializing. I was also worried about possible pressure down the f-file if he got in e5. In retrospect, castling kingside would have probably helped me on the defensive aspect of that. Anyway, that's why I held off and ended up castling queenside. (Should I have just not even thought about castling queenside in this kind of structure?)
In the middle game, I think I played pretty passively, and things went downhill fast as the graph shows. I think I probably just didn't grok the structure. Any tips there? I knew my opponent was playing for the e5 break and that it's important to fight that. Are there things I could have done differently to play better against that?
And I know from the computer analysis that after my opponent gets in e5, trading the pawns is the best choice. I'm not sure I fully understand why, though. (Although I understand why my actual move, which fell into the knight fork, was poor.)
I'm doubtful about my 10th move. I didn't think I wanted my queen there long term, as it didn't fit in with my plans, and I knew it might be difficult to ever swing it back around.
On move 14, I strongly considered the queen trade and simplifying, trusting in my pretty solid structure (and again suspecting my queen is misplaced anyway). Would that have been better, do you think? (Computer puts what I did in the game as better, but marginally.)
The dark square bishop is usually a good piece in the London. It was an awful piece in this game. Are there things I could have done to make it a better piece? For instance could I have tried to trade it off?
Maybe it's just that I played a series of sub-par moves and put myself on the defensive, and that's why I never got anything going and put myself in a position to put any plan into action, but I felt like my opponent had shut down the kingside pretty well.
Anyway, I would welcome tips and suggestions. Thanks in advance!
I have less experience playing against the Dutch than I do some other openings (and I've been learning the London, so it's relatively new to me too), so it was good to get a chance to play against it, and I was hoping some players with more experience against the Dutch could help me learn from it.
My own thoughts:
I thought I came out of the opening without much advantage but OK. One thing I have since learned is that playing the London System against the Dutch, developing your light-square bishop to c4 early can be useful if it can help you disrupt castling. Otherwise it probably would have made more sense to develop it to e2, since the thematic bishop sacrifices of the London to open up the kingside are not going to work in a pawn structure like this.
It's likely I should have castled kingside, and earlier than I did castle. My idea was I wanted to mount a kingside attack with my pawns and rooks and queen, which never came close to materializing. I was also worried about possible pressure down the f-file if he got in e5. In retrospect, castling kingside would have probably helped me on the defensive aspect of that. Anyway, that's why I held off and ended up castling queenside. (Should I have just not even thought about castling queenside in this kind of structure?)
In the middle game, I think I played pretty passively, and things went downhill fast as the graph shows. I think I probably just didn't grok the structure. Any tips there? I knew my opponent was playing for the e5 break and that it's important to fight that. Are there things I could have done differently to play better against that?
And I know from the computer analysis that after my opponent gets in e5, trading the pawns is the best choice. I'm not sure I fully understand why, though. (Although I understand why my actual move, which fell into the knight fork, was poor.)
I'm doubtful about my 10th move. I didn't think I wanted my queen there long term, as it didn't fit in with my plans, and I knew it might be difficult to ever swing it back around.
On move 14, I strongly considered the queen trade and simplifying, trusting in my pretty solid structure (and again suspecting my queen is misplaced anyway). Would that have been better, do you think? (Computer puts what I did in the game as better, but marginally.)
The dark square bishop is usually a good piece in the London. It was an awful piece in this game. Are there things I could have done to make it a better piece? For instance could I have tried to trade it off?
Maybe it's just that I played a series of sub-par moves and put myself on the defensive, and that's why I never got anything going and put myself in a position to put any plan into action, but I felt like my opponent had shut down the kingside pretty well.
Anyway, I would welcome tips and suggestions. Thanks in advance!