Is the Lasker variation of QGD a good option for black?

it's rare to see people talking about this variation. Looks good and very solid. It is a realible option for black in QGD? Thank you!

It is fine. The main problem is that White probably play 4.Nf3 or 3.cxd5. So you have to know more.

It’s a good option. Seems to work well with black 👍

There are lots of trolly posts about Berlin and Petroff means white can get nothing with 1e4. However the Lasker in combination with semi-tarrasch, can use it if white tries for an exchange variation 1.d4 d5 2c4 e6 3Nc3 Nf6 4pxp Nxp, although black can defend the exchange variation itself 4...pxp quite comfortably too, gives white as much problems finding an advantage.

Yes, at least at top level. I don't know if I'd necessarily recommend it to players below a certain rating, but it was played in one of the most important chess games of the 21st century, the last game of the 2010 World Championship between Topalov and Anand. And black even won!

As mentioned above, players who employ this line as black do need to think about many other areas of their repertoires. For instance, they need to have a reply to the Catalan and the Bf4 QGD lines. If you achieve this line via the QGD move order, then you need to study the Carlsbad as well. If you achieve it via the Nimzo move order (i.e. 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5, as played by most of the top GMs these days) then you of course need to know how to play the Nimzo and how to face various other d4 sidelines.

ive come across it a few times, its good

but you also gotta have a weapon agianst other lines where white goes Ne2-f3 or where white plays the QGD like a system or anything else

Play 7-Nbd7 instead. It is very solid. See a book Play 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 by Kornev. I have never lost a game in high level cc with these variations.<

Hi! I think Lasker's variation is a rather good and solid, although it is seen as a somewhat drawish. I sometimes play Capablanca's variation which normally gives almost an identical position -execpt for the pawn in h6. I find that you need to know a lot of theory to play Capablanca's variation -and I suppose it is the same for the Lasker's- going well beyond move 20, so it´s not for everyone.

For a more dynamic variation, you can choose the Tartakowers' instead.

Good luck!

In the repertoire book Keep It Simple for Black by Christof Sielecki after 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 Nf3 he uses 4...a6. He says he first became aware of the move while watching Magnus Carlsen playing online Blitz/Rapid games. In his database Carlsen scored 7 wins, 9 draws, 0 losses.

I used to play the Lasker's some but it's been quite a while. I consider myself a solid player and that's why I was drawn to it, but I don't have quite the patience I used to have. It seemed a bit too defensive to me back then so I imagine it would seem more so to me now. I never learned it well though so that could have just been me.

Going off topic a bit, it is often said that modern chess player's play much better chess than the oldtimer's but I think if Lasker or Capablanca had seen the Topalov v Anand game they would assessed the white player as a club player, and black a decent player. It is really an astonishing bad game by Topalov.

yeah it was

Indeed we are talking about the same variation. MCO 15th Ed. calls 6...Nbd7 the Orthodox Variation while FCO calls it Capablanca Variation.

On the other hand both opening books agree on the name of the Lasker Variation.

I give also ECO codes of the variations below just for reference:

Orthodox/ Capablanca Variation ECO Code: D6

Lasker Variation ECO Code: D56 and D57

Capablanca played 6...Nbd7 followed by c5 quite a lot. The modern twist from Kramnik is to include h6 and Bg5-Bh4.

There is also the Capablanca freeing manoever 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Be7 5e3 0.0

6Nf3 Nb-d7 7. Rc1 c6 8Bd3 pxp 9Bxp Nd5 10BxB QxB 110.0 NxN 12RxN which reaches the same position as the Topalov game above, except that pawn is on h7, instead of h6.

From some reason continuing 12...e5 is most common from the Capablanca move order, but

Since a Smyslov v Kasparov game 13...b6 more common in the Lasker move order. Both are probably playable in each case. Black doesn't need to know a lot of theory in these lines, just understand principals.

Hi! You are welcome. There so many sources of information...the choice depends on your goals and current level. I give my opinion below on the sources I mentioned in my post:

FCO = Fundamental Chess Openings by van der Sterren (2009).

It has a lot of writing but little variations and in general doesn't go deeper than , say, 10-12 moves-with exceptions. Good for players up to intermediate level.

MCO = Modern Chess Openings 15th Ed by De Firmian (2008). In my opinion MCO is a good balance between explanations and detail of variations. Good for intermediates and beyond.

ECO = Encyclopedia of Chess Openings by Matanovic/Chess Informant. It is very detailed and structured, no words only symbols, it takes a while getting used to it. I would recommend it for advanced players and beyond

Good luck!

Personally think books like MCO are obsolete now, and never were must help to club players. It more helpful to get annotations of games, for example "Test of time" for Kasparov's explanation of Smyslov v Kasparov game in the Lasker. Probably many places have notes to Topalov v Anand game mentioned earlier in thread.