Central play against 1.d4? please some suggestions!

Hello,

I’ve a really hard time to define my repertoire against 1.d4. I studied quite a bit and tried the Benko. The best result i had from it is when the opponent declines the gambit. But if he has some idea what to do and accepts it, i struggle often.

I’m pretty straightforward player: I like quick development, solid pawn structure with center play. I don’t look to win out of the opening, i like driving in slow(ish) water then, if all went well, transition to a favourable ending after accumulating small advantages:

I’m afraid of the slav (especially the semi slav) because of all the theoritical lines
I consider Nimzo but i find myself playing better in the middlegame and endgame with my bishop
I consider the QID but you’ve to know the nimzo too if he plays Nc3
I’m not to much of counterattack in the distance like in the KID
The Grunfeld? Considering it but also seems very theoritical
The QGA? Never thought much of it when i played white but i never really looked into it also so might be surprised
Tarrash: IQP is hard to manoeuvre but i like the active aspect without gambitting too much
QGD there are many line maybe i should go into those waters.
The Dutch, like the QGA, i've never found it too difficult when playing white

I only intead to review deeply my repertoire when preparing a specific OTB match for my club. When not, i don't dwell too much into opening theory. The best would just to try, but i was curious for some feedbacks!

Thanks in advance!!

You'll get there :)

If you like playing the Queens Indian but hate the Nimzo, and are ok with the QGD, you can play the QGD with a nimzo move order.  1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 and now 3...b6 if 3.Nf3 and 3...d5 if 3.Nc3.

Wow, your hard to please. Maybe try the Horwitz Defense (1....e6).

The name's French Transposition.

Good.

I play the english with early g3 as white. Before that a played 1.d4, 2.c4 and 3Nf3. And vs 1.e4 I play the Caro kann because it gives me solid structure and, very often, my opponents are not too well prepared against it (for example they play a lot Bd3 to exchange light square bishop in the advanced variation) which helps me in the optic of building small advantages

 

Uhm, no!  1.d4 e6 is not called the "French Transposition".  I have seen some sources use "Horwitz Defense", but quite frankly, it should have no name at all at this point.  It is completely unknown and is 99.9999999% likely to transpose to a known opening, as long as you don't do something stupid like 1.d4 e6 2.h4? Qg5??.

 

2.e4 would be the French Defense.

2.Nf3 Nf6 (or 2...d5) 3.Bf4 would be the London System

2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 would be the Colle System

2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bg5 would be the Torre Attack

2.c4 b6 would be the English Defense

2.c4 Nf6 is back to what was discussed where you could end up in a Nimzo-Indian, Queen's Indian, Benoni (After 3.Nf3 c5), Catalan (3.g3), Queen's Gambit Declined (After 3.Nc3 d5 or 3.Nf3 d5), etc.

 

Players that play the Nimzo-Indian, Queen's Gambit Declined, or any other defense with an early e6 that also happen to play the French I actually recommend play 1...e6, like 1.d4 e6 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bb4.  It avoids certain Queen Pawn openings by White, most notably the Trompowsky Attack.

Some great suggestions for sure! I've heard before that C-K is close to slav in structurakre and ideas. But I always felt overwhelmed by the sharp lines of the semi slav where you've to be pretty accurate. I like the tartakower set up but I require specific move order that only arise a smaller number of time. The idea of QID again Nf3 and QGD against Nc3.

1 d4 e6 2 e4 is not yet the French Defense. Black doesn't have to reply 2 ... d5. He could play the Franco-Benoni with 2 ... c5, a much rarer opening, or it could even still transpose into the English Defense after 2 ... b6 3 c4 Bb7.
Likewise, 1 d4 e6 2 Nf3 Nf6 3 e3 isn't yet the Colle since Black hasn't played ... d5. Even then, after 3 ... d5, White could continue with another opening, perhaps playing 4 c4 instead of a usual Colle continuation with 4 Bd3 followed by c3, etc.

Somebody know who are the most recent known tartakower defense and QID players? For the first I know Spassky and tartakower (obv) and I like their style! I'll wait for semi slav after a few game with the above but it might take some time I mostly seem to play against e4 or London system

Horwitz Defence?! Never heard of it. Don't even know who Horwitz is. People should call it "Old French" or "French Transposition".

No it isn't. French defence is 1.e4 e6 not 1.e4 e6 2. d4 d5

1 e4 e6 may technically be defined by many as the French Defense, based mainly upon its origination centuries ago. But try finding modern chess books on the French that don't primarily focus on the 2 d4 d5 continuations, with maybe a couple chapters on rarer continuations. There's still too many possibilities imo to label 1 e4 e6 as a French already. If you want to call 1 e4 e6 2 d4 b6 3 c4 Bb7 4 Bd3 a French, its fine with me, but I think you're more likely to find it in a book on the English Defense than in a book on the French. It's kind of like calling every game that begins 1 e4 c5 2 Nc3 a Closed Sicilian, though many think it is already.

And I didn't define the French Defense as 1.e4 e6 2. d4 d5. I had only mentioned playing 2 ... d5 as a way of getting to it after 1 d4 e6 2 e4. That's just my opinion, which many will disagree with, since after 2 e4 is played, that already seems to satisfy the historical definition, though as I pointed out, it seems premature to me. It could still be the Franco-Benoni or the English Defense.

To get back on topic and answer the OP, maybe an answer to 1 d4 could also be the English Defence or the Old Indian. The OI might be considered inferior to the KID, but it's simpler to learn and play. Or the Janowski Indian Defense (1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 d6 3 Nc3 Bf5), which is actually a line of the Old Indian.

The Tartakower is a good suggestion, but unless you play the Old Tartakower (do people play it again?), many if not most will avoid the refined Tartakower with 7 Bxf6.
Karpov liked to play the QID in response to 3 Nf3, so you might try checking some of his games.

You've played a whole bunch of openings, change after a bit of experience and then start again. I'm thinking the problem isn't the openings.

So, you would like an opening with black that allows you to retain the two bishops, avoid a cramped position, be free from any pawn weaknesses, and yet doesn't have an excessive amount of theory! Sounds simple enough!

 

No because it's not a French at all, and it only transposes if White plays 2.e4 and Black plays 2...d5.

 

If White doesn't play 2.e4, it can end up a Nimzo-Indain, Queen's Gambit Declined, English Defense, Dutch, or one of many other defenses, but it is NOT a French or Old French or French Transposition or French anything!

If White does play 2.e4, and Black doesn't play 2...d5, it's still not a French.  Here's some other openings that 1.d4 e6 2.e4 can lead to:

 

2...d5 is of course the French

2...c5 leads to a Sicilian after 3.Nf3 or a Franco Benoni after 3.d5

2...b6 is Owens Defense, and will transpose to the English Defense if White plays c4.