3. e4 in Queen's Gambit Accepted?

I genuinely do not understand why this is not the most popular line. I thought the point of the gambit was the remove the pawn from guarding the e4 square so you could put two pawns in the center. Why are other lines like e3 and nf3 more popular?

Because the game can get very sharp and messy after 3.e4. A lot of players (especially 1.d4 players) prefer a more safe approach. And white still have two centre pawns after 3.Nf3 or 3.e3.

3. e4 is a more natural looking move, but it was thought for a long time that Black equalized with 3…e5. Although additional resources have been found for White in that line, 3. Nf3 has remained more popular because it gives Black less scope for counterplay.

The QGA might be the opening in chess I know the most about, having played both sides of it for a very long time (and suffering many bad losses on both sides too!) so my ears always perk up a bit when I see a thread about it.

The long and short of it is that 3. e4 is fine. 3. Nf3 is fine. 3. e3 is also fine. I would say these three moves are equally strong and they are the only three critical moves.

I am a fan of 3. e4. But I understand the appeal of the other moves. After 3. e4, black has at least three very reputable replies and several additional weird sidelines. 3...e5 is the old main line and remains in good theoretical health. 3...Nf6 is more imbalanced but also a critical move that has been played by many top players. 3...b5 with the idea 4. a4 c6 5. axb5 cxb5 6. Nc3 Qb6 is a new line just in the past year that's become important as well, largely due to Leinier Dominguez.

Additionally, 3...Nc6 exists as a sideline. I played it for several years as black. It is a bit dubious objectively and I can think of several problems with it. But many masters I've faced haven't known the relevant theory there and it's tricky. I won plenty of easy games with it both OTB and online.

Then you have 3...c5 which requires some attention, as well as another line within 3...b5 (4. a4 c6 5. axb5 cxb5 6. Nc3 a6!?) where black sacrifices an exchange immediately. All of these things have theory.

3. e3 and 3. Nf3 also have tons of theory. But the difference is I think that theory is more streamlined, in the sense that there are fewer sidelines white has to know, so it tends to come to similar positions. The character of 3. e4 totally varies depending on which third move black chooses. So you could argue it's easier for white to play 3. e3 or 3. Nf3 in that sense.

I think 3. e4 is a great move and I've played it myself. It's clearly at least as critical as 3. Nf3 and 3. e3 (that is to say, obviously all lead to a draw with best play although white can apply some pressure here and there). But as a frequent QGA player on the black side too, I do understand why a lot of tournament players would rather not have to learn such a wide array of different types of positions, which is necessary to play 3. e4.

Anyone interested in learning more about the QGA can check out the videos by Hanging Pawns on YouTube. He has 4 of them: the general theory of the QGA, the 3. Nf3 line, the 3. e4 line, and the 3. e3 line. In about 2 hours of video time, one can decide whether to consider playing the QGA. If so, the videos are a decent base for beginning to learn the opening.

I think also that 3.e3 is more trappy and the thing with 3.Nf3 is that Black can transpose into the Slav and there is the added option of getting an IQP in some lines which some people like to get. I also like 3.e4 as it is the most straightforward and most people I face don’t play 3…e5 which I consider the best move. I was able to setup the Greek Gift sacrifice against it many times although it starts to not work after a certain level

My two cents is that 3.e4 is more ambitious, while 3.Nf3/e3 tends to be more positional and quiet in nature where White plays for a small but long lasting advantage.

That said, at the beginner/intermediate levels, I would honestly recommend 3.e4 because it is often the case that most players don't really know what they're doing when they grab that pawn on c4, which makes grabbing the center a little more attractive.

this is similar (i think) to why the closed ruy is more popular than the open ruy

its more similar to the other variations (white can choose to disallow the open ruy) and also more strategical (more likely what black wants from e4 e5)

I can tell you that I played the QGA back in 2021 for about 6 to 9 months and gave up on it because I kept getting squeezed into long, draining losses where White keeps on squeezing liquid out of a rock and ultimately winning a pawn and the game with 3.Nf3. It kept on feeling like I was playing for 2 results if White played 3.Nf3, and Black winning was NOT one of those two!

Had little to no issue with 3.e4, which I was playing 3...Nc6 against, and probably scored about 50%.

Other than the one Qf3 trap that every Russian toddler knows, I don’t see how it’s all that trappier than anything else 🤷

I play 3. Nf3 against the QGA, it is a very logical move that tries to prevent black's e5. I also don't mind if the game evolves into a Slav later.

3. e4 is more ambitious.

3. e3 is probably the safest approach for white.

Traditionally this was the case. According to GM Chris Ward and author on the QGA. the twin pawn centre is the best.

He describes as being told it "was wrong" to play e4 after the capture as a youngster, but subsequently discovered through his own mature experience and analysis it was what he believed was the objective best move.

I get the impression that "emperor's new clothes" informed thinking on this for quite a while. It turns out that the simple innocent intuition of seizing the centre has proved the best means of proceeding. There are of course subjective reason for selecting the other options as there might for example if not entering an open Sicilian from the white perspective.

I think that's what Ben Finegold said about it. Don't know 3.e3 too well other than for Black to play 3...e5

Good

wow