trompovsky for black

i have played this rated guy in the tournament nd he will play again in the next tournament..he keeps playing the trompovsky for white...please guys suggest me a sharp line that gives some good intiiativ and position for black after white gives up his bishop pair...he usualy plays d4 nf6 bg5 and i dont know how to contine

The sharpest lines come from 2...c5.

About all I can say is pick up an "objective" book on the Trompowsky (not some White or Black repertoire book) and study the hell out of the 2...c5 chapter(s).

write me a message and I will show you my secret line against it...

The lines with 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5 d5 3.Bxf6 gxf6!? are also interesting and may offer more original play than 2...c5!?.

why should white take on f6 after d5?!

@Till_98 Out of curiosity, could you tell me what you think is the most challenging move after 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5 d5? I think 3.Bxf6 is the main line in most sources. Is it 3.e3?

My favourite line to date is one recommended by Boris alterman which goes:
1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5 e6 3.e4 c5 with very messy positions.

I'm pretty sure Black doesn't get the initiative a lot in the 2...c5 lines...

MetalRatel, with Bxf6 you reach less than nothing. Whites best move is of course e3 after which white gets a very pleasent position, although it should be equal by good play. After e3 white tries to get a stonewall setup ( pawns on c3,d4,e3,f4) without a bad black squared bishop. Often white gets a big attack while black doesnt know what he did wrong. From all answers against the Trompovsky I fear 2.d5 the less.

I used to aim for the desirable "Trompowsky stonewall" attacking formation, but it can be prevented here:

3.e3 c5 4.c3 (4.Bxf6 gxf6 is good for Black; 4.Nc3 is a Veresov) Ne4 (4...Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6 is another interesting possibility mentioned by Kaufman. This is similar to an effective defense Black uses in the London.) 5.Bf4 Nc6 6.Nd2 Nxd2 7.Qxd2 Bf5 8.Nf3 e6= (Sedlak - Dembo, Budva 2009) is a simple line given by Palliser.

I see no problems for Black here. 3.Bxf6 is perhaps not theoretically ambitious, but at least it creates an interesting imbalance. I never cared much for these positions as White though, so naturally, I gave up the Trompowsky!

I think 2...c5 and 2...Ne4 are the best ways to imbalance things.

The downside of 2...c5 is the Vaganian gambit in which Black could be defending for literally the entire game.

The downside of 2...Ne4 is that it's probably the first move covered in every tromp book so you won't be suprising anyone but yourself with it...

c5 is the sharpest answer 

With 2...c5 and 2...Ne4 (followed by c5), you have to do a lot of analytical work and accurate defending to play it well. I knew a candidate master who always played the Trompowsky and he loved to play gambit lines against 2...c5 and 2...Ne4 (with a very nice win against Orest Popoyvch http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1265547), but found 2...d5 to be annoying. The problem is that you can't force an improved Torre Attack with a "Trompowsky stonewall" due to the lines I stated above and Black is very solid with 3.Bxf6 exf6. This is what Kaufman recommends and it takes a lot less study to get a good position out of the opening.