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

Its the vision of the future where we move around stone wheels that Deidre likes. Then there is the realistic understanding of the influence of technology on chess.

The bottom line is kids have more new information than they know what to do with. So lets not use the new information according to Diedre? lol. The point is to organize the new information to suit the kid(or adult). To get the kids(or adults) to not focus on "eval" and memorization(as black).

The Cambridge Springs trap is the one above given by SmithyQ, althought I don't know if there is an official name for it.

The reason u are confused is probably because the elephant trap can occur via Cambridge Springs move order.

After 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Nbd7 setting the trap : white can fall into it or can play "normal" chess with 5.Nf3 (or e3) c6 (or Be7 to play a "classical" QGD) 6.e3 Qa5 and we obtain the Cambridge Springs variation.

I don't know why this is called Elephant trap and I can't find anything on it.

Hey, Smyslov, in #50 IM Dunnington favours 4. Nf3 instead of 4. e4 because of 5. ...e5, what do you think? 

@pulpofeira, yes, I'm aware of e5. Alekhine mentioned it in his best games book. I'm also aware that isn't the end of the story. Black does get counterplay with e5, but White still has an edge.

In fact, e4 is played a fair bit in correspondence, with White usually winning! This is true even for +2200 rated players in this century.

A funny ending position. Black resigns on move 18 with no piece off the back rank!

I hope the 3 pawns he "won" made him feel better haha.

just go with the nimzo-indian, its an amazing defense that's playable with differing degrees of complexity at all levels. he will also learn positional chess without even studying much. its just the kind of defense that makes you conscious of the importance of pawn structure. 

tradition always teaches to learn classical chess first, but i have found that if you mix it up or even begin with hypermodern first, classical style becomes a breeze to learn later on.

One nice thing about the position (below) is you can teach it as sort of a system.

As others have pointed out, true beginners play a lot of random stuff, so particular openings may not matter (if their white opponents are never playing d4+c4 for example).

The 900-1300 players on the high school team I coached generally liked the Slav better than the QGD because it got the QB into the game more easily.  Otherwise I can't recommend one over the other.

QGD is more understandable and easier to play at these levels

Yup. It seems that players with OTB  ratings starting with 2 are in broad agreement.

I like this defense and often win with Old Indian Defense, but for white rare play 1. d4. For black I recommend play 1... Kf6 or 1...f5. If You like 1... d5, I don't know this system, very rare play 1... d5, recommend Quenn's gambit declined. In Queen's gambit accepted You have tightened position. 

Good game, it was is cool win. 

Good game. It was is cool victory

The TMB isn't passive, but it's complex. I don't think I'd teach it many of my students as their primary defensive set up. The move order is tricky, and the play in the center isn't always clear-cut. It's a very difficult opening to play well.

Usually when I see a player rated below 2000 trying it, they do indeed get passive positions. Stronger players know how to create counterplay with it. A gifted scholastic player could definitely use the TMB to get interesting positions. But I wouldn't recommend it as a blanket first choice repertoire for most scholastic players.

i know next to nothing on the queen gambit declined, but this tarkatower stuff just looks unpleasant for black. White seems to get a nice shaky looking center to bully for little risk it seems.

but this is absolutely a topic i have no say in, just a personal observation. i avoid IQP positions at all costs too.

i would worry teaching such a system to a scholastic player unless they were really advanced, playing queenside fianchetoes only to abandon it half way or blocking it with a d-pawn doesnt look like it would teach the lesson they should be learning. some of these positions look like the kind of scholastic nightmare position where i can see a student of mine complain post-mortem that they controlled the center, and developed quickly,and then didnt know how to proceed improving the position.

I find it interesting you mention the early exchange and that it is "equal", either way. In post game analyses I have seen, seem to favor losing the "e" pawn, instead of the "c" pawn. I have often wondered if losing the "c" pawn isn't better, since you maintain 2 center pawns, with perhaps a chance to win one of white's two central pawns, thus giving you a lasting advantage. I would love to see what you or some stronger players than either of us, have to say about the subject. 

As I watch this game unfold, I am reminded of the Fischer favorite, Sicilian Najdorf. I also find value in playing systems that will either transpose or put you into similar pawn structures, whether you are confronting e4 or d4. I find it shortens the learning curve. It is easier to play in positions that you are more familiar or comfortable with. Thanks for sharing. I may try the Tartakower. I love the Slav/Semi-Slav modern triangle also, since similar pawn structures to the Sicilian Najdorf can occur. 

I played it as my primary defense / still sort of do.

One side or the other often gets the hanging pawns or IQP, and, as they say, it's just a game of chess.

I've had some pretty bad losses as the owner of the IQP where I got confused and didn't know how to place my pieces. I've had some nice wins too. Like most positions it's just how well you know how to handle it.

Maybe it's bad for scholastic players, I don't know.

can the karpov variation of the caro kann also be played actively? if you fianchetto the B on b7

Good game, this debut has appeared to be active.