"Always sacrifice your opponent's pieces!"
-Siegbert Tarrasch
Is QGD Best for Post-Beginner to Learn?
Sort:
Jun 20, 2018
0
#22
For beginners, the opening is not critical since your opponent most likely won't know too much theory. Focus on not blundering material and learning tactics.
"Always sacrifice your opponent's pieces!"
-Siegbert Tarrasch
"Always sacrifice your opponent's pieces!"
-Siegbert Tarrasch
TitanChess666 wrote:
"Always sacrifice your opponent's pieces!"
-Siegbert Tarrasch
"Always sacrifice your opponent's pieces!"
-Siegbert Tarrasch
I like it!
OP - The QGD is excellent for the post-beginner to learn.
You might check out...
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/best-books-resources-to-learn-the-black-side-of-the-qgd?page=1
also check IM pfren's comments here (regarding the Tartakower & Lasker variations)...
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/what-is-the-best-qgd-variation-for-the-club-player-as-black
Jun 20, 2018
0
#25
QGD is fine, and often recommended.
What's more is it's not bitter medicine, you'll get comfortable positions.
The wiki article is not a bad place to start. Look at, for example, the tartakower and lasker variations.
Chess for dummies is a good book for a beginner.
If you want to improve your chess quickly at this level, the best opening that you should pick is 1.e4 as White. It's just because, your priority must be studying tactics rather than openings at this level. When you become familiar with the fundamental tactical ideas and opening principles, you can play 1.d4 easily. This doesn't mean that you cannot play 1.d4 at this level, but playing 1.e4 must be much more helpful for you to improve your chess.
MaDLife37 wrote:
If you want to improve your chess quickly at this level, the best opening that you should pick is 1.e4 as White. It's just because, your priority must be studying tactics rather than openings at this level. When you become familiar with the fundamental tactical ideas and opening principles, you can play 1.d4 easily. This doesn't mean that you cannot play 1.d4 at this level, but playing 1.e4 must be much more helpful for you to improve your chess.
The OP is inquiring about the QGD, which is a defense for Black against 1.d4/2.c4
e4 has less theory than d4, so I study e4, Grand Prix attack, Exchange Caro-Kan, Exchange French, Scotch Gambit. All those are pretty good shortcuts.
RussBell wrote:
... also check IM pfren's comments here (regarding the Tartakower & Lasker variations)...
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/what-is-the-best-qgd-variation-for-the-club-player-as-black
"Naka used the Lasker a couple of days ago to get what's probably his easiest draw against Magnus so far.
I think the Lasker (simple, rock solid, not terribly ambitious) combined with the more ambitious Tartakower at some point (the Tartakower does require good understanding of certain pawn structures like the hanging pawns and the isolani) can form (with a few additions, of course) an excellent repertoire against 1.d4, 1.Nf3 and 1.c4." - IM pfren (June 25, 2015)
IMHO ordinary players should avoid the Queen's Gambit as there are too many good replies for Black, eg Orthodox, Slav, Semi-Slav, Tarrasch, Vienna, Accepted, Tchigorin, Baltic, etc. 1.e4 players face the same problem with the Ruy Lopez (Spanish) but at least they have good alternatives such as the Italian or Scotch.
Jun 21, 2018
0
#32
Year1993 schreef:
I am planning on studying QGD for my 1.d4 as both Black and White, and to study Sicilian to play against 1.e4. I look at some masters' games they inspire me a lot. Which variation of QGD and Sicilian that I should know?
As for the Queen's Gambit Declined, you definitely want to look into the exchange variation. As for the Sicilian, that's all a matter of taste. But i think the Classical variation is a good place to start. Personally, i very much like Kasparov's way of handling the Najdorf. As in the Scheveningen way 5...a6 followed by e6.
RathminesRampager wrote:
IMHO ordinary players should avoid the Queen's Gambit as there are too many good replies for Black, eg Orthodox, Slav, Semi-Slav, Tarrasch, Vienna, Accepted, Tchigorin, Baltic, etc. 1.e4 players face the same problem with the Ruy Lopez (Spanish) but at least they have good alternatives such as the Italian or Scotch.
See my reply in post #32.
[COMMENT DELETED]
Finally, I come up with my personal favorite opening.
Against 1.e4 except Ruy, I will use Four Knights.
Against Ruy Lopez, I will play Berlin defense.
As White, I will try to learn the general theme of QGD.
Reason: Resource is available! My friend lend me his books: Berlin Wall, Four Knights Move by Move. I myself also purchase QGD by Matthew Sadler. With that being sad, I can focus on studying chess, rather than googling "what opening should beginners play" 
Jun 22, 2018
0
#36
Year1993 wrote:
Finally, I come up with my personal favorite opening.
Against 1.e4 except Ruy, I will use Four Knights.
Very sensible and good choice I'd say.
Against Ruy Lopez, I will play Berlin defense.
Bad! lol 
This defense actually sets black a lot of practical problems. GMs thought it was not good for many decades until Kramnik revived it in his match vs Kasparov. If you want to avoid a lot of theory I guess I'd suggest the scandinavian (1.e4 d5).
As White, I will try to learn the general theme of QGD.
White plays the queen's gambit with c4, but its black who chooses the QGD, QGA, and maybe 6 other choices hah. (Slav, Nimzo, Chigorin, etc). In other words 1.d4 + 2.c4 as white walks into the meat of the 1.d4 theory. If you want to play 1.d4 without all that then the London system is a fine choice.
Reason: Resource is available! My friend lend me his books: Berlin Wall, Four Knights Move by Move. I myself also purchase QGD by Matthew Sadler. Good author. Good book. But remember QGD is the black side of it. With that being sad, I can focus on studying chess, rather than googling "what opening should beginners play"
Preggo_Basashi wrote:
Year1993 wrote:
Finally, I come up with my personal favorite opening.
Against 1.e4 except Ruy, I will use Four Knights.
Very sensible and good choice I'd say.
Against Ruy Lopez, I will play Berlin defense.
Bad! lol This defense actually sets black a lot of practical problems. GMs thought it was not good for many decades until Kramnik revived it in his match vs Kasparov. If you want to avoid a lot of theory I guess I'd suggest the scandinavian (1.e4 d5).
As White, I will try to learn the general theme of QGD.
White plays the queen's gambit with c4, but its black who chooses the QGD, QGA, and maybe 6 other choices hah. (Slav, Nimzo, Chigorin, etc). In other words 1.d4 + 2.c4 as white walks into the meat of the 1.d4 theory. If you want to play 1.d4 without all that then the London system is a fine choice.
Reason: Resource is available! My friend lend me his books: Berlin Wall, Four Knights Move by Move. I myself also purchase QGD by Matthew Sadler. Good author. Good book. But remember QGD is the black side of it. With that being sad, I can focus on studying chess, rather than googling "what opening should beginners play"
I also thought about Scandinavian but somehow I feel that this opening is not very helpful for me to learn chess... And, the Berlin Wall book is just a masterpiece! I mean, as far as I know, John Cox is the only author talking about the endgame in an opening book! Playing Berlin defense, I can learn and practice tons of chess knowledge, so it is a perfect choice for me
QGD by Matthew Sadler discuss and connect the themes of the most popular choices of Black against 1.d4, especially the isolani. Pawn structure is what I am always interested in but 1.e4 seems to not provide me such experience.
I am not playing to win because there is no chess club/ competition in my town. I just want to enjoy chess as much as you all want to
Year1993 wrote:
Finally, I come up with my personal favorite opening.
Against 1.e4 except Ruy, I will use Four Knights. ...
After 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nf6, even if White does not play 3 Bb5, Black can not depend on being able to play a Four Knights Game. After 3 Bc4, Black is able to choose the two knights defence.
Again: What is a beginner? To make it simple, let's just stick to the Chess.com player pool - What rating, at what time control, are we talking about here? This is why I still think Chess.com should have a Classical rating like Lichess and PlayChess have now. Classical, Rapid, Blitz, Bullet. This way we can better decipher what we're talking about in what case. People like some openings for their effectiveness in blitz and yet would never actually open that way in a classical. Same with bullet, etc. Having extremely detailed ratings just like the national federations and FIDE would serve the game and community here better, IMO.
If I ever have a chance to reach 2000, I will play blitz. Until then, I will be loyal to 30min
My brain cannot work that way. I need time to think in chess just like I need time to input the number into my calculator to do math ( I passed Calculus I, II, III with A's but I can only do simple math calculation without calculator 
)