finding resources for 1.d4

hello everyone! I've been looking into playing 1.d4 and I have run into a few problems. namely the Indian defenses. I feel rather confident about the KID for some reason, at least in blitz, however I am looking for an answer to the grunfeld and the nimzo, as well as maybe some ideas against the benoni (as a result of being paralyzed by choice) and semi slav (Be 2 meran, b3 systems, Qc2, etc.) I've looked into a few repertoire books to get an idea but I haven't been able to decide what to do. I have been primarily an e4 player with an ambitious repertoire ( ruy lopez, tal var caro, tarrasch/Nc3 French, open Sicilian/rossolimo) and a rather classical style with black (e4e5, d4-nimzo/qgd 4...Be 7) but still consider myself to be a pretty attacking player. I like to find complications in seemingly simple positions to throw my opponents off, and because of this I really look up to Alekhine for his crazy ideas in typically calm positions, playing sidelines against mainline openings to get the opponent in unfamiliar waters, while still being positionally sound. I would hope my white repertoire would be indicative of this, hopefully without reams of mainline theory that my opponent would be more prepared for. thanks for any insights!

Play e4 bro please

I play e4 in my main repertoire. This is just so I can play D4 too

if you play 1.d4 there will be reams of mainline theory that your opponent maybe more prepared for. there is no easy way out as white if you play 1.d4. particularly, if you follow with 2.c4.

it's like saying that I want to play 1.e4 but I don't want to face the Sicilian. it's not realistic.

if you want to cut down on theory, but still play 1.d4, playing the Trompovski and the Veresov could be two good options. they would avoid most theory in the Indian defenses as well as 1.d4,d5 2.c4 type games.

good luck👍.

I don't think you understand what I mean @chessterd5. I'm not trying to avoid mainline theory. I'm trying to get positions that my opponent won't be completely familiar with. Like the semi slav Be 2 meran or the Bf4 grunfeld. These aren't shortcuts, in fact they have their own reams of mainline theory. I just want to put my opponent in unknown territory ideally.

OR play in a position where I'm slightly better and can outplay my opponent (although this is limited in more testing lines)

there is no unknown territory. if black plays the semi slav or the Grunfeld it is because that is thier defense of choice against 1.d4. they will be familiar with the lines by sheer experience of playing it against 1.d4 on a regular basis.

on the other note, you cannot rely on the idea of "where I'm slightly better." as a magic bullet. any good defensive player is going to equalize.

Against GI this is an intersting side line.

@chessterd5 this is not helpful advice. I think you overestimate how booked up people are at my level, or really at any level below 2200 or so. I just want interesting games with a comfortable position to push for a win. That's easiest when my opponent is in an unfamiliar position. Even high level players adopt this approach with good success (Carlson, Rapport, etc.)

this is extremely helpful advice. it's just not what you want to hear.

a) you are the same level they are. Why is it possible for you to know unfamiliar positions better? I have seen 1500s booked up in thier pet lines to the point of giving expert level players fits.

b) The difference between high level players playing unfamiliar positions is this. they are trying to avoid known theory. All of them already know it. Carlsen, Rappaport, or whoever are achieving these "unfamiliar" positions by regurgitating computer lines.

"I just want interesting games with a comfortable position to push for a win."

I find the best way to get to that is find positions in your opening(s) of choice that you are comfortable with and go from there.

"That's easiest when my opponent is in an unfamiliar position."

Playing on this site, how can you possibly know what your opponent is familiar with? With random pairing, you play against so many people that the opening prep you run into is going to be all over the place from not much to super booked in a pet line.

So aim for positions _you_ want. If your opponent doesn't know the theory, then all the better for you. If they are booked up in that line, at least you are in your comfort zone. Either way, it's good for you.

Hi!

Here my recommendations against:

Nimzo, 4. Qc2 line is quite solid

Gruenfeld: 4. cd5, Nd5 5. e4, Nc3 6 bc3 Bg7 7. Nf3, c5 8. Rb1 !? with active play

Semi-slav: 5. Bg5, dc4 6 e4 with sharp play

Benoni: 6 e4, g6 7 Bd3, Bg7 8 h3 trying to limit Blacks play

Good luck!

I'm going into this with 3 assumptions: unfixed repertoire, 2. e4 whenever possible, and no unsound lines/ultra-deep mainlines.

In the Slav and Triangle System, I'd highly recommend the 3. Nf3 4. e3 lines, which are rich and deep while also being positional enough to allow for some interesting positions with unfamiliarity. The nice thing about these lines is that they can't lead to the Semi-Slav. Be prepared for some players to play 4... f5 in the Triangle Slav, leading to a better Stonewall for Black. 

Against the QGD, I'm going to recommend the Catalan with 3. Nf3 and 4. g3. More on that later.

Against the KID, I highly highly highly recommend 3. f3! leading to the Saemisch KID or a VERY favorable variation of the Neo-Grunfeld for White. A possible downside of this line is that it can lead to a very theoretical and tactical line of the Benoni, although White will be better if Black (for some unholy reason) is booked up on that line.

Against the East Indian, go with the 3. g3 Anti-Nimzo, leading to the Catalan, Benoni, and BID. I find this to be much better than the 3. Nf3 Anti-Nimzo as you avoid the QID and some of the more popular mainlines of the BID and Benoni in exchange for the sidelines that you can play being slightly worse and more positional.

Essentially, I'm recommending the Saemisch KID, Quiet Slav, Catalan, and four sidelines: two in the Benoni, one in the Stonewall, and one in the Neo-Grunfeld. Once you figure those out, you have a ready-made d4 repertoire.

Thank you for being helpful I haven't looked much into the white side of the catalan, and the Saemisch Kings Indian is already a line I am a little familiar with due to the pawn structures that can arise from it and its flexibility. I'm surprised you are recommending the Quiet Slav lines though, as it seems that the lines following 3.Nf3 4.e3 seem rather subtle and transpositional, maybe a little harder to understand than the mainlines, although with the semi slav it seems all pretty irrational so I will definitely consider it.

My issue with 1.d4 is that I am not entirely sure what position I would want to arrive at, and whether that should be the "testing" options that are mainlines or something more quiet, or some random sideline at that. What I'm really trying to do is dip my toes into this complex of openings to have some kind of fundamental understanding of the opening without being bogged down with the ultra sharp critical lines that can end in forced draws. I don't see the point in studying these positions if it takes so much work and I end up with an equal position anyway. WIth that in mind, I am willing to play for an equal position, I just don't want to put in as much work as I have so far with trying to learn the Botvinnik and Anti-Moscow Gambit.

This is a fair take for sure, but the issue is not that I am trying to take an "easy way out". You are misunderstanding my point in this post completely, and it's getting a little annoying that you are continuing to come back without actually contributing to the post at all. Yes, I know why Grandmasters avoid mainlines. Yes, I know why mainlines are played. Trust me, I do not typically play sidelines, when I play e4 I play all the main lines because I am certain that I am far better prepared than they are. My issue is that I am not a fan of many d4 mainlines. The botvinnik and mainline meran both seem like complicated messes that I am certain that someone playing the semislav will know how to manouvre the position and destroy me, and I don't want to study these positions to get to an equal position that an equally sound option that is less common can provide with less study. If someone had recommended I learned the mainlines, within reason, I would very strongly consider their opinion if they think it is that important to study d4 mainlines. That being said, nearly every repertoire avoids the meran and the botvinnik and recommends the slow slav or some sideline. Repertoires advocate for the mainline in the grunfeld, but if the opponent knows the theory it can lead to a forced draw, which I thoroughly dislike. It is one of the reasons why I want to switch to d4, as the Berlin, Marshall, Sveshnikov, and various sicilians are analysed to forced draws, which is rather annoying. I don't want to play into prep that is 60 moves deep (overexaggerration) and would rather have some kind of nuance to my play, with sidelines. Obviously not every opening is like this, but specifically the ones that are I would like to avoid.

To be fair, I didn't have much to work with in the Slav. It was either the Quiet Slav, allowing the Semi-Slav, or recommending 3. Nc3 and going with a Marshall Gambit, Exchange Slav, and a really drawish QGA-Slav repertoire. I could find a more traditional and aggressive repertoire or tweak choices in places if you'd like.

@Ethan_Brollier what do you play against the slav

If you're looking for a great opening that 90% of players don't know how to play against, consider the Jovava London.

If your opponent know show to play against the Jobava, you'll have a comfortable position with easy play. If they don't (most people don't) you may get to fork them with your bishop and knight. Daniel naroditsky and Alex Banzea have lots of great content on this opening if you're interested.

You don't even have to study the Nimzo if you don't want to, because you can simply avoid it!

They will likely play d5 and you'll transpose into a queen's gambit declined.

Against the Grunfeld you can play this great line with 60% win rate.

Also if you do decide to play the Jobava London, you can even avoid all of this theory and play it against nearly everything.

I play the line I recommended to you, the Krause Attack. Beyond that, I play positionally because I have literally never once reached the position as either color, so there's no point currently in knowing the theory, although I do remember that the Sharp Line of the Wiesbaden splits in four directions with 14. Kc1, 14. Ke1, 14. Kc3, and 14. Kc2, and that the Morozevich Carlsbad variation often ends in a forced draw between moves 30 to 35.