Dutch: Leningrad, 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.Nh3
Dutch: Leningrad, 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.Nh3
Definition
The line generally arises after the moves 1. d4 f5 2. g3 Nf6 3. Bg2 g6 4. Nf3 Bg7 5. Nh3, although slightly different move-orders with 1. c4 or an early Nc3 are also common. It is a branch of the Leningrad Variation of the Dutch Defence in which White develops the g1-knight to h3 instead of the more conventional f3 or e2.
Core Ideas
- Knight Manoeuvre: Nh3–f4 is White’s defining plan. From f4 the knight eyes e6 and g6, supports an e2–e4 thrust, and can jump to d3 or h5.
- Light-Square Pressure: With the bishop on g2 and a knight on f4, White targets the e6-c8 diagonal, making Black’s traditional …e7–e5 break harder to achieve.
- Controlling e4 and d5: If Black plays …d6 and …e5 too soon, the f4-knight plus Bg2 often generate tactical pressure on d5 and e6.
- Delayed Castling Options: White often keeps the king in the centre for a while, weighing up queenside castling if the f-file opens.
- Psychological Value: The sideline nature forces Dutch specialists to leave main-line theory early—handy as a surprise weapon.
Strategic Significance for Both Sides
- White aims for piece activity rather than an immediate pawn centre. Central breaks with e2–e4 or d4–d5 often follow the successful deployment of the f4-knight.
- Black must decide between:
- …d6 and …c6 setups (solid but passive), or
- …Nc6, …e5 and kingside expansion with …f4 (ambitious but risky).
Typical Continuations
After 5.Nh3, three popular Black replies illustrate the strategic clash:
- 5…O-O 6.O-O d6 7.Nf4 c6
Black chooses a restrained formation, hoping to prepare …e5 later. - 5…c6 6.O-O d6 7.Nf4 e5
The thematic break; sharp play follows after 8.dxe5 dxe5 9.Qxd8+ Kxd8. - 5…d5?! 6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.Qb3
Immediate central action by Black can run into tactical problems because the f-pawn weakens e6 and g6.
Historical Background
The Leningrad Dutch itself was explored deeply by Soviet masters—Averbakh, Tolush, and later Viktor Korchnoi—in the 1950s–70s. The Nh3 sideline became fashionable in the 1990s when players like Nigel Short and Piotr Svidler used it as a low-theory alternative. Grandmasters have since employed it sporadically to dodge modern engine-driven preparation in the main lines with 5.O-O or 5.c4.
Model Games
- Short – Kramnik, Linares 1994
White’s Nh3-f4 manoeuvre restricted Black’s …e5 break, leading to a positional squeeze and a famous conversion by Short. - Kamsky – Van Wely, Tilburg 1997
Demonstrates the dangers for Black when …e5 is played prematurely; White sacrificed a pawn, opened the centre, and the g2-bishop decided the game. - Grischuk – Le Quang Liem, World Cup 2019
A modern illustration where Black equalised with accurate …c6–d5 breaks, showing that the line is playable for both sides at top level.
Typical Plans & Motifs
- For White
- Nh3-f4, sometimes followed by h4-h5 to soften g6.
- e2–e4 central break, especially after Re1 and f2–f3 support.
- Queenside expansion with b2–b4 if Black fixes the centre.
- For Black
- …e5 break, freeing the g7-bishop.
- …c6 & …Qe8–Qf7 to bolster e6 and prepare …e5.
- Minor-piece trade …Bxh3 if allowed, doubling White’s h-pawns.
Interesting Facts & Anecdotes
- The nickname “Harry the Knight” is sometimes used by English streamers for the h-knight that marches to f4 and h5 in this system.
- Because 5.Nh3 looks “anti-positional” (knight on the rim), several grandmasters have used it as a practical joke in blitz to lure Dutch aficionados into unfamiliar territory—only to wheel out home preparation.
- Statistic lovers: in the pre-engine era (up to 2000) the line scored above 55% for White in master play; with modern engines the win-rate has levelled to roughly 50%, reflecting improved remedies for Black.
Conclusion
Dutch: Leningrad with 5.Nh3 is a flexible, strategically rich sideline. It trades immediate theoretical advantage for practical pressure and imbalances, making it a valuable weapon for players who enjoy manoeuvring battles and who want to avoid the deepest layers of Leningrad main-line theory.