Black's best response to d4?

Regarding what kborg called Botvinnik's approach of combining KID and Pirc, this will usually not lead to similar positions beyond the first couple of moves, though.  And the theory on both is quite taxing, so it doesn't make sense to combine these two openings if you want to get by with sporadic opening studies.

A while ago I read Jovanka Houska's book about the Center Counter out of sheer curiosity. Very nice book and enticing opening. If I weren't into the Pirc already, I would probably give it a try.   

I have to respectfully disagree.  If I'm a lower-rated player then the assumption is that my opponent also doesn't know the opening very well.  Against such an opponent, theoretical preparation may not be that useful:  they'll tend to deviate rather early from the book lines anyway. 

As a lower-rated player I got by for many years playing KID, Pirc/Modern and the King's Indian Attack as White. I didn't memorize any variations and I didn't spend a lot of time studying the opening.  After each  game I would usually look up the variation in the book to see if I could have improved my play.  I gradually learned the kinds of formations to use against the major lines by my opponent:  for example I knew the formation to use for Black against the Saemisch KID and I knew how to set up my pieces against the Pirc Austrian Attack.  This approach was so successful that I continued to use it for a long time even though the Pirc/KID is not really my style of play. 

Ok, this sounds plausible, especially the part where you say that you always looked up the variation after each game. This really is a good thing to do!  Still, if people are looking for an opening repertoire that is low on theory per se, the combination of KIA/KID/PIRC would not be that good a choice. For those, I'd rather recommend something like 1.b3/1...b6 (which, of course, comes with the price of being a bit suspect).  

Way back in this thread suggested to OP to stick to what already playing slav, but  learn a few more deeper ideas about it. Since keen on studing as little opening theory as possible, that seems as miminalistic as can get . Silman as a nice recent article were looks at someone's game with a6 version of slav.

http://www.chess.com/article/view/threats-real-amp-imagined

It's really hard to say which one is better. We'll all have the answer to that question when the "result" of a chess game can be decided with a 100% precision. But for that to happen, it's said that are lots of years left. So the only thing left for us, is to play things that are not clearly wrong trying to enjoy the best.

Lots of great chess players have played 1...d5, 1...Nf6 and more, and still now, noone is sure which one is better. So, chose one you like, study it, play it, commit mistakes and learn from them and make yourself a better chess player ;)

It all really depends on what kind of player you are. If you enjoy attacking, use the KID. If you are solid, hope to usee the Slav.

I'm not familiar with Charlick Gambit but this opening (1.d4 e5)

I always play d5, but I'm exploring variations that allow for exchanges. KIA can work well if your opponent doesn't crumble it before you finish it as while you're trying to get into that position, you're slightly more vulnerable.

Double Post:My chess buddy has just suggested playing e6 or c6, allowing white to build up an reinforce a pawn centre, then playing d5 and attacking it furiously.

Unfortunately, if White responses to this attack by piling up more defensive pieces into the centre, it might lead to a locked position in which black is forced to defend as White's pawns edge forward slowly but surely, steamrolling over Black's pieces. If this ever happens, then White is likely to offer up pawns in order to get your pieces out of the way or create a structural weakness, like doubled pawns. Do not accept. All of your moves should be directed to developing, castling, and making an unshatterable position which can be used to counter attack White.

Helltank, I disagree with you completely.

Black doesn't defend as much as counterattacks in the Horwitz(e6) with breaks like c5! or f5!

Because e4 has been played, the French is way different than the QGD, even though black has pawns on e6 & d5 in each.

My advice would be to learn the Slav

This is true, but there are transpositional possibilities between the two.  1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4 is an example, or Black can decline the Gambit 1.d4 d5 2.e4 with 2...e6. 

There is even more overlap if Black plays the move order 1.d4 e6 2.c4 d5.  White has a lot of alternatives such as 2.Nf3 or 1.Nf3 where it is helpful for Black to have a common setup against 1.e4 and 1.d4.

Anyone looking to combine French and QGD might consider the Tarrasch approach to the Queen's Gambit with 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c5. 

1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 or 2.e4 is not a Queen's gambit.

And- anyway, 2.Nc3 is best answered by 2...Nf6 (2...Bf5 is also ok) and after 2.e4 it would be foolish not caching the blundered pawn (although I did it once by 2...c6 and won pretty easily).

I do c6 against 1. d4 in hopes of reaching a c-k.

1.d4 e5 is my standard opening as black.

You can play different gambits with this starting position.

I prefer 2...d6 (Blackburne-Hartlaub-Gambit) or 2...f6 (Soller-Gambit), because it is more tactical than the Englund-Variation with 2...Nc6 and 3...Qe7.

Sure, these Gambits are not really sound, but if White isnt prepared you have very good practical chances, even in tournament-games on Club-Level.

Iam pleased with my results and these gambits give a lot more fun for tactical players than standard openings like the Queens Gambit or KID.

How about albin's counter gambit

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDfjsMXlcek&feature=player_embedded

If not

Nizmo indian defense

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htNc9zFPdQs&feature=player_embedded

If he won't play Nc3 but instead plays Nf3

Queen's indian defense

http://www.thechesswebsite.com/chess-openings/queens-indian-defense.php

u make it sound easy! :P

That's a great idea but you need a plan when White uses an unusual move order to get into the Queen's Gambit.  Some players will play 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 followed by 3.c4.  The Chigorin Defense to the Queen's Gambit (1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6) is a good complement to the Albin Countergambit.  So if White plays 1.d4 d5 2.c4 then you can't go 2...e5 right away.  But if White plays 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 then you can't play 2...e5.  So instead you go 2...Nc6 3.c4 e5!? 4.dxe5 d4 and reach the Albin Countergambit.  Another benefit of the Chigorin Defense is that if you're sure that your opponent knows the Albin very well, you can always vary with 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6 and still hope to reach an interesting and unbalanced tactical position. 

I just started playing the Nimzo against d4. I like it. I probably don't have a clue, but I like it.  After 1) d4   Nf6 , 2) c4  e6, 3) Nc3  B b4,  4) N f3   0-0,  5) ?     b6,  preparing to fianchetto the queen side.