1.d4 repertoire advice.

Read Boris Avrukh's 2 1.D4 books, theyre good.

Summary of what they cover?

I would suggest the bisop development to g3 because you can play the same idea/setup against a variaty of openings.

• Catalan against the Queens Indian / Nimzo Indian en Queens Indian (Personally i prefer Bogolan's book over Averuk but both are good with no doubt)
• Against the Semi Slav you can use g3 as well. Robert Ris wrote a nice 1 hour lecture about it (available from chess base)
• Against the Dutch the g3 setup works well too

I would not suggest the g3 variation against kings indian and grunfeld indian. Against kings indian i think the g3 variation leads to a roughly equal game with less chances for a win for white than in the normal setups. Perosnally i like the bayonet here.

Against grunfeld i like the quit setup with taking on d4 and then e4 Nxc3. After that play Be3 / Rc1 /Qd2

The Chessbase DVD by Ftacnik is quite comprehensive, gives you recommended lines against pretty much everything you are likely to see as White. Some of the lines are quite tame though, eg. 5.Bf4 in the Gruenfeld and the Makogonov variation (h3 on move 6 or 7) in the Kings Indian although he does suggest playing 4.Qc2 in the Nimzo Indian and the main lines in the QGA and Dutch.

I actually think that is an advantage of 1.e4 -- the decision of what to play against the Sicilian is independent of what to play against 1...e5. If you are sick of your line against, say, the Caro-Kann, you just change it and keep your lines against the rest as they were..

With 1.d4, if you want to switch from 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 to 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 that may mean you're suddenly playing different lines across a whole range of openings, from the QGD to switching from the Nimzo to the Bogo/Queen's Indian.

Like, if you want to play the QGD exchange, you do need to build your repertoire around it, because you need to delay Nf3 for it to work (otherwise black develops his Bc8 too easily). So you need to play 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 because of 3...d5, so you have to allow the Nimzo.

Those books are fantastic

I pre-ordered his GM repertoire book Beating 1. d4 sidelines a few days ago. 

Thanks to our friendship and my taking your candid advice after we played!  I truly apreciate your advice.  Just as you reccommended, I started studying tactics like a mad dog and hired a coach. 

Avrukh's books are fantastic, award-winning, groundbreaking! 

But they're also geared toward players who already have a very advanced understanding of chess, probably +2000 strength OTB. 

The advantages you get by playing his lines are microscopic, and extremely difficult to manage. For the vast majority of players, Playing the Queen's Gambit offers a much more realistic chance at an opening you can feel comfortable playing for decades.

What about the Queens Gambit as the primary line and the Veresov against 1. ...Nf6 is that logical? 

I'm having Deja Vu here.

It is certainly sharp, but hardly solid.  The Veresov is anti-positional as White blocks his c-pawn with his knight. White must make something out of his early initiative and active piece play, or he will get crushed positionally.  Generally if Black makes it to the endgame, White is in trouble.  GM Eric Prie (who specializes in irregular d-pawn openings) gives 2. Nc3 a ?!, and says he would almost play any other endgame then those arising out of the Verseov.  That said, there are a lot of current GM games transposing from the Neo-London to Verseov type lines (1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 c5 3. Nc3.)

Anyone play the Veresov regularly OTB? 

I've been looking at some GM games and found these Veresov games.  Somewhat informative as I have never even heard of the opening until I started this thread.

It's somewhat rare to see a GM level player drop his Queen, but a nice reminder that we all make mistakes.

A loss with the Veresov

I'll take a pass on the Catalan.  QGA/QGD with the Veresov against 1...Nf6 sidelines is what I'm considering.  The Queens gambit does not need to be qualified, however I'm going to order the Nigel Short book on the Veresov and take a look at the middlegames and endgames.  The few Veresov games I have reviewed were 50/50 on decent endgame pawn structures.

Would the London throw off a player that plays 1. ..Nf6?  My main OTB opponent plays the Colle Zukertort and Colle Koltanowksi-Phoenix and I do not wish to mirror his play.  It would not make for exciting games. 

I could perhaps play the London against the 1. ..Nf6 sidelines though?

Does anyone play the London, if so how are the endgames?

Nge2 offers the greatest advantage in modern theory. However, the problem is that it requires careful, slow, positional play at almost a master level, otherwise black gains counter chances.

I think there are quite a few good antidotes to the Veresov, and many black players tend to know one of them. E.g.

I think the Trompovsky (1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5) is a much better option, if you want something to bypass all the Indian defences. It's actually used by strong players.

I never said the catalan is low maintance. Just that only that you can build a repetoir with the Bishop on g2 and that plans work within many systems. I also do not think that the catalan is more high maintenance than for example the d4/e6 complex with cambridge springs, capablanca, Lasker, Tarrash, semi slav etc.

@Satxusa: You forgot the slav defence. It is played a lot and very different from QGD.

I also do not really understand why you would play the Veresov against Nf6 but c4 against d5. This forces you to learn 2 opening systems for the same setup as black wil answer 2. Nc3 with d5 anyway. I would either play the Veresov against anything or play something else against Nf6 like the tromp

You can expect 1...Nf6 . Many of opponents if FIDE-rated tournaments play this.

The opening is where White has to win with the Veresov.  White has the advantage of the first move and his pieces will be more active.  If Black is allowed to survive the opening than White begins to have a real problem with his knight on c3.  The main try for White is the Morris Gambit.  White gets a lot of development for his pawn and it is very similar (and often transposes to) the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit.  It has the same defect as the Blackmar-Dimer Gambit/; namely that although White gets plenty of initiative and activity for his pieces, Black has to make no concessions in his central pawn structure and if he can ride out White's initial activity he has a good game.  There is a reason the Veresov isn't seen at the top levels of chess.