so i have this book i bought written by jakob aagard and esben lund called meeting 1.d4 it covers the tarrasch defence and similar structures against pretty much everything not named 1.e4. this is the line he gave against 5 dxc5 which i feel is a very important line because he simply takes the free pawn you give him and you have to justify it by active play so i want to learn this line extra well

and at the end of the game with the line he recommends black "yes black" resigns and he comments "black is fighting but the white pawn majority whold decide the game in white favour". i kind of appricitiate hes honesty on the lines but this wasnt much motivating when you want to learn a line.

after 24.Be2 he writes

a very interesting endgame has arisen. white has and extra pawn but at the same time his pawnformation is damaged. if white could somehow transfer his knight to D4 he would be ok but it seems difficult. the bishop is superior to the knight in this position but a pawn is, after all, a pawn, so we we bet on white here

to his credit he comments that f5 was bad and 24...Rhc8 is better but that is the only improvment he gives.

any one have a better line to recommend or is this line good despite aagards brutal honesty about the line? i guess you shouldnt expect a advantage in any line as black

I don't know, because don't play opening either from white or black perspective. Aagard has written a more recent book on Tarrasch, GM Rep 10, that should answer it. Chould ask on the quality chess blog, if it does.

If black had castled instead of 15. Nd5 he would have done much better; actually his position then would have been decent but as a result of that move he remains on the defense, unable to castle, with his moves dictated by each move white makes.  By the time you get to move 24 Black seems at a clear disadvantage regardless.