1. d4 Defense for Classical Scholastic: QGD or Slav?

9-year old son.  I informed him to play d5 in response to 1. d4.  No KID, Grunfeld, Nimzo, Dutch until later.  Want him to start with classical foundation, then branch out later if he chooses.  2 Questions:

1)  Which is better for the 1000 - 1100 Scholastic to learn:  QGD with 2... e6 or 2.... c6 (Slav)?

2)  Which one has more flexiblity in meeting the 1. c4 and 1. Nf3 Openings?  I.e., Is the QGD or is the Slav more easily "transferable" to playing against the English or the Reti?  The answer to this question would seem to have some bearing on the choice between QGD or Slav.

Addendum.  He knows Opening Principles.  He'll soon be playing up against C, B, and A players.  He's also learning e5 as response to 1. e4.   So no French or Caro-Kann.  

Which choice would you recommend between the two?

QGD with a triangle system (e6, d5, and c6) is the most solid and will transpose more often as black's moves are similar against all common d4 setups and white often has no choice but to enter mainline QGD to get anything.

There's really no difference between playing e6 first or c6, unless white exchanges immediately, but those positions are equal.

Doubt you'll see much independent c4 or Nf3 openings at the 1000 level.  Either they go to the QGD or they don't know openings and play random/natural moves.

The true Slav isn't playable unless white plays d4/c4/Nc3 on his first three moves.  Heavily recommend the QGD, with either 2...e6 or c6, for your situation.

"The true Slav isn't playable unless white plays d4/c4/Nc3 on his first three moves.  Heavily recommend the QGD, with either 2...e6 or c6, for your situation."

What is meant by "true Slav"?  Is there a Slav that is "False"?  I've heard of Semi-Slav which I'm still trying to remember what that means.  

What I recall is that the Slav is pretty tactical with some rather sharp lines which requires a fair amount of memorization.  And that QGD is cramped and positional, and that you have to learn how to play against the Minority Attack.  

At his level (and mine too, for that matter) I just want him to reach a playable middlegame and knowing/understanding the plans for each side.  

I mean the actual Slav, which goes something like d4/d5, c4/c6, Nc3/Bf5.  Anything else is some kind of Slav hybrid.  If White starts with 3.Nf3 instead of Nc3 black has to play a waiting move like a6 or Nf6 which takes away his options later on if he wants to play Bf5 and try and transpose back to a Slav.

The Semi-Slav is what I recommended: black plays d5, e6, c6, and Nf6.  The key difference is that in the Slav black tries to get his LSB out with Bf5, which is risky, but in the Semi-Slav he delays this for a more solid position.  The Slav definitely requires more memorization, especially if white tries Qb3 lines, which are dangerous against the Slav because moving the LSB leaves b7 unprotected.  In the Slav black also usually has to concede the center and/or the bishop pair, but his pieces are more active.

Given your last sentence, the QGD or Semi Slav is preferable to the Slav.  It's a bit cramped, but it's playable at all levels and white's advantage is small.  It's also a lot less hectic, which makes it easier for a younger player to understand all the plans without having to worry about crazy tactical sequences.  

I'm trying to understand something a bit better.  How does Black's LSB get to f5 in the Semi-Slav when it gets blocked in by e6?

Also, can I call this "Triangle System" the Semi-Slav?  It seems interchangeable to me.

Here's my understanding so far:

A)  QGD.  The LSB is blocked for the time being by 2.... e6.

B)  Slav.  The LSB is going to get to f5.  White is probably going to play Qb3 at some point, and it gets tactical and sharp.  Which encourages memorization.

C)  Semi-Slav aka Triangle.  The e6-d5-c6 configuration, and the LSB is locked in just like the QGD.  Play for e5 or c5 pawn break.

Please correct my summation.

QGD is simple, and easy to understand.

Slav is not at all obvious...

QGD goes in the same way than basic principles : u play e6 to develop quickly Bf8, then u can castle.

e6 is a developing move, not c6.

We always learn beginners 1.e4 e5 and 1.d4 d5 for some reasons : they are the natural openings which fit to basic principles.

And it is also the same for high level players, where 1.e4 e5 and 1.d4 d5 are the more popular openings.

You're pretty much right for all of it.  Black's LSB stays put for a while in the Semi-Slav.  It gets out as black plays for the e5 or c5 pawn breaks.  It's similar to the LSB in the French; it's bad for a while but if black plays well it gets better.  When playing as black you don't get everything and a (temporarily) weak LSB is the cost in the Semi-Slav.

Triangle typically means your first 3 moves are the pawn moves mentioned.  It can transpose to the Semi-Slav, but White can try 4. e4, which is a gambit, or black can try a quick dxc4 and try to hold the pawn with b5 or try and transpose to the QGA.  The QGD move order with d5/e6/Nf6/c6 is safest.

The QGD is technically anything after d4/d5/c4 and anything other than dxc4.  The LSB is usually bad for a bit but it depends on what variation you play.  After e6 black can later go to the semi-slav or try a quick c5.  In some lines black plays b6 and Bb7.  The best thing to do is look at the position after d4/d5 c4/e6, Nc3/Nf6, Nf3/?? and decide what line to play from there.

Considering your sons rating range, I would recommend the Slav.  It allows the light squared bishop to get outside the pawn chain.  There is a really good FREE book on the Slav, on chessable,com.

Agreed!

Btw, the QGD Tarrasch is an excellent opening for scholastic players. It's simple to understand, the pieces get developed quickly to natural squares, and Black has ready-made counterplay. The main drawback is the problem of the IQP, but that is actually an excellent pedagogical issue that a scholastic player should learn anyway. On top of that, it's relatively easy to learn other openings from the Tarrasch. 

The Tarrasch is an excellent opening for mid-level scholastic players! 

Would recommended QGD too, with maybe 1.d4 d5 2c4 e6 3Nc3 Nf6 4pxp Nxp, if they find the exchange variation boring. The slav wouldn't be too bad if concetrate on developing the light square bishop, but definitely avoid a complicate opening like the semi-slav, The popularity of semi-slav on chess-com seems to be motivated by fear of the QGD exchange variation, were can play c6xd5, instead of e6xd5. Exploiting white's advantages in some called carlsbad structure needs high level positional skills, which most inexperienced players don't have, even in cases like 4pxp pxp, where white can aim to restrict black's white squared bishop. Quite often the exchange is made with no hope of any advantages at all. 

Wow.  I can't believe it.  I have honestly never seen the Fianchetto Variation of the QGD before your comment illustrating it, lol.  It seems so natural.  Beautiful in a nice, simple way.  My son can definitely understand that opening.

Have seen a lot of greek players recommend that must be some coach from there that likes it. Don't see much wrong with it, and can improve to Tartakower with h6, Bh4, or BxN, if it is improving, when feel like it,

DeirdreSkys QGDortho-fianchetto is indeed nice, but you would need something easy against the exchange variation, young players hate pawn tensions and the exchange is the most advised line against the QG (chessexplained, Bartholomew). Dont get the guy out of the opening just that he gets crushed by the f3 e4 pawnroller

I thought London/Colle/Barry/Stonewall and the exchange were all not played anymore. No Catalan anymore, no nothing but setting up a Bb7 for black. Are you trying to ruin the trend and bring back all of these attacks by white?

nighteyes i got the irony there , all i said was that it will most likely be an exchange queens gambit - please share your preferred line against whites setup

you want to bore your child to death?

I agree with you lol. For me, I ignore so-called opening principles and play all out positioning.

And so I recommend getting beat over and over again judo-like until defense is learned and can be played steadily.

And that explains a lot. However, a kid who learns karate and is excited that he or she can kick azz does not yet have the karate perspective. And a teacher who would ignore teaching patience and discipline would be a complete idiot.

tell that to all those 10 year old asian kids rated 2000 i played at world open. i think "fun" is overrated.