Answers.Body: <p>In most Dutch games, Black labors mightly to get 1...e5 in (and prevent White from playing e4). If you're a Dutch player and someone plays 1. c4 on you, and you don't play 1...e5, you might have missed the point. (A good reminder that understanding the principles and ideas behind an opening is more important than memorizing the moves.)</p>
  
  <p>Here's a good primer from one of the [Classical] Dutch's modern advocates:
  <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7Oex0bZd30" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7Oex0bZd30</a> </p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2017-10-17T02:31:02.357Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2017-10-17T02:31:02.357Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Eduardo Suastegui
Answers.Body: <p>Chessbase free account has 2 lines of continuation</p>
  
  <pre><code>4.e3
  4.g3 
  </code></pre>
  
  <p>With White having better results from these two lines. <br>
  Though three chess engines (Deep Rybka, Stockfish and Komodo) state 4. dxe5 is better. </p>
  
  <p>Determined outcomes no, but there is enough games to go over to get a good sense on what might be wrong with 3...e5. </p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2017-10-18T08:41:29.083Z
Answers.Text: I am pretty sure the two games you found arrived from a different move order, say 1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 f5 3.e3/g3 N6 4.d4. After 3...e5?, White should obviously take the given pawn rather than transpose in these lines.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Evargalo
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2016-06-27T03:41:57.733Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2016-06-27T06:12:00.113Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2016-06-27T06:12:00.113Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Aaron M
Answers.Body: <p><strong>This isn't necessarily an answer</strong>; it's some amusing searches and information that might help others get a "real" answer.  (It just seemed too much for a comment.)</p>
  
  <p>I'm not familiar with this setup, so I resorted to "Google-fu".</p>
  
  <p>A quick Google search found <a href="http://www.365chess.com/opening.php?m=3&amp;n=63&amp;ms=c4.f5&amp;ns=15.63" rel="noreferrer">A10 English, Anglo-Dutch defense</a>.  Following forward with 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. d4 e5 shows only a <em>single game</em> (but see below): <a href="http://www.365chess.com/view_game.php?g=588601&amp;m=7" rel="noreferrer">Haring vs. Freiberger</a>, at the Werther 2000.  One game is not going to give you much theory to go on...</p>
  
  <p>My search was simply "1. c4 f5", for those wishing to play along at home.  Hopefully those 365chess.com links work for people without accounts; it's free, but they sometimes hide things behind log in screens...</p>
  
  <p>I've found that 365Chess.com's game database isn't the most robust, so I did some more searching, and found <a href="http://studimonetari.org/edg/latex/rittenhouse.pdf" rel="noreferrer">this pdf</a> claiming this is the Rittenhouse gambit, with 5 games played (all with dates between 1972 and 2001, inclusive).</p>
  
  <p>Unfortunately, that's where my trail led dry... I'm finding several links online of people calling this the Rittenhouse gambit, but no real information ON the Rittenhouse gambit.</p>
  
  <p>Good luck!</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2016-06-24T22:37:57.890Z
Answers.Text: Thanks, the links are helpful. I'll post updates if I find more.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Alt
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2016-06-25T06:33:26.427Z
Answers.Text: That Haring–Freiberger game doesn't make much sense to me. Was it a prearranged draw or something?
Answers.UserDisplayName: bof
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2016-06-28T22:06:44.523Z
Answers.Text: @bof - A little more Google-fu found this: http://www.chessbites.com/Games.aspx?d=xpxLpLZC (which I believe is the results of the tournament in question).  This was the fifth game played, and both ended the tournament with a score of 2 1/2 (out of five) - so it is entirely possible that, at some point, they just decided to draw.  Unless you know someone at the tournament, it's going to be hard to tell for sure.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Ghotir
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2016-06-24T21:34:25.903Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2016-06-24T21:34:25.903Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Ghotir
Body: <p>How do the two systems work against each other? In particular, let's say I'm playing white, and the opponent has played e7-e5 after a Bird-like opening:</p>
  
  <pre><code>[fen "rnbqkb1r/pppp2pp/5n2/4pp2/2PP4/2N5/PP2PPPP/R1BQKBNR w KQkq e6 0 4"]
  </code></pre>
  
  <p>Are there any theoretically studied variations here that lead to determined outcomes?</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2016-06-25T21:44:51.600Z
Comments.Text: For clarity, this is not Bird's Opening. Bird's Opening is 1.f4. 1.d4 f5 is the Dutch Defense. 1.c4 f5 often transposes to a Dutch Defense when White plays a later d4, as he has done here.
Comments.UserDisplayName: dfan
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2016-06-27T06:07:21.927Z
Comments.Text: In my opinion, Black just gets a worse Budapester, which is already a theoretically unsound opening. White could be already in a winning position after 4. dxe5. That could explain why there is no literature about this variation.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Glorfindel
Tags: <opening><english-opening><dutch-defense>
Title: English opening against Dutch defense
ThreadText: # English opening against Dutch defense
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2016-06-24)
  
  How do the two systems work against each other? In particular, let's say I'm playing white, and the opponent has played e7-e5 after a Bird-like opening:
  [fen "rnbqkb1r/pppp2pp/5n2/4pp2/2PP4/2N5/PP2PPPP/R1BQKBNR w KQkq e6 0 4"]
  
  Are there any theoretically studied variations here that lead to determined outcomes?
  
  **Tags:** opening, english-opening, dutch-defense
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: For clarity, this is not Bird's Opening. Bird's Opening is 1.f4. 1.d4 f5 is the Dutch Defense. 1.c4 f5 often transposes to a Dutch Defense when White plays a later d4, as he has done here.  
  > **username_2**: In my opinion, Black just gets a worse Budapester, which is already a theoretically unsound opening. White could be already in a winning position after 4. dxe5. That could explain why there is no literature about this variation.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 3 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_6 on 2016-06-24. Score: 5 | Accepted answer
  
  **This isn't necessarily an answer**; it's some amusing searches and information that might help others get a "real" answer. (It just seemed too much for a comment.)
  
  I'm not familiar with this setup, so I resorted to "Google-fu".
  
  A quick Google search found [A10 English, Anglo-Dutch defense](http://www.365chess.com/opening.php?m=3&n=63&ms=c4.f5&ns=15.63). Following forward with 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. d4 e5 shows only a *single game* (but see below): [Haring vs. Freiberger](http://www.365chess.com/view_game.php?g=588601&m=7), at the Werther 2000. One game is not going to give you much theory to go on...
  
  My search was simply "1. c4 f5", for those wishing to play along at home. Hopefully those 365chess.com links work for people without accounts; it's free, but they sometimes hide things behind log in screens...
  
  I've found that 365Chess.com's game database isn't the most robust, so I did some more searching, and found [this pdf](http://studimonetari.org/edg/latex/rittenhouse.pdf) claiming this is the Rittenhouse gambit, with 5 games played (all with dates between 1972 and 2001, inclusive).
  
  Unfortunately, that's where my trail led dry... I'm finding several links online of people calling this the Rittenhouse gambit, but no real information ON the Rittenhouse gambit.
  
  Good luck!
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_0**: Thanks, the links are helpful. I'll post updates if I find more.  
  > **username_7**: That Haring–Freiberger game doesn't make much sense to me. Was it a prearranged draw or something?  
  > **username_6**: @username_7 - A little more Google-fu found this: http://www.chessbites.com/Games.aspx?d=xpxLpLZC (which I believe is the results of the tournament in question).  This was the fifth game played, and both ended the tournament with a score of 2 1/2 (out of five) - so it is entirely possible that, at some point, they just decided to draw.  Unless you know someone at the tournament, it's going to be hard to tell for sure.  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2017-10-17. Score: 2
  
  In most Dutch games, Black labors mightly to get 1...e5 in (and prevent White from playing e4). If you're a Dutch player and someone plays 1. c4 on you, and you don't play 1...e5, you might have missed the point. (A good reminder that understanding the principles and ideas behind an opening is more important than memorizing the moves.)
  
  Here's a good primer from one of the [Classical] Dutch's modern advocates:
  <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7Oex0bZd30>
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_4 on 2016-06-27. Score: 1
  
  Chessbase free account has 2 lines of continuation
  4.e3
  4.g3 
  
  With White having better results from these two lines. 
  Though three chess engines (Deep Rybka, Stockfish and Komodo) state 4. dxe5 is better. 
  Determined outcomes no, but there is enough games to go over to get a good sense on what might be wrong with 3...e5.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_5**: I am pretty sure the two games you found arrived from a different move order, say 1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 f5 3.e3/g3 N6 4.d4. After 3...e5?, White should obviously take the given pawn rather than transpose in these lines.  
  
  ---
  
  