Is the QGD objectively best against 1.d4

Im_just_bad wrote:

No it can't :/


Come back to the kindergarten in order to learn some basic things. blitz.pnggrin.png's_Gambit_Declined_Slav_defence


QGD is excellent.

Though, at the top level, many of today's Super GMs tend to prefer the Semi-Slav. It's a bit more aggressive than the QGD Orthodox.

Semi-Slav and QGD are like cousins—they look similar, but they branch apart with key differences in strategy.

my137thaccount wrote:

That's an unhelpful description as the Slav and 2...e6 share little in common. Usually QGD means exclusively 2...e6.


It's debatable. I'm lazy to search extensive references but look here, for example:'s_Gambit_Declined_Slav_defence

Yigor wrote:
MickinMD wrote:

In chess,com Openinings Explorer's Master Games, there were:

68,329 2...c6, the Slav Defense

52,819 2...e6, the Queen's Gambit Declined

17,870 2...dxc4, the Queen's Gambit Accepted

~6599 2...other responses.


It depends on the terminology cuz Slav can be considered as a part of QGD. 

Good point!  But then the discussion should be about Declined vs Accepted because after 1 d4, chess com's opening explorer shows:

452,896 1...Nf6

185,260 1...d5 the Queen's Gambit in any form isn't close to being "almost exclusively played" and 1...NF6, usually leading to Indian Defenses, is played 2.5 times more often!  And the "top" GM's often play 1...Nf6 - including Caruana and Carlsen in the two Black games to date (one for each player) where 1 d4 was played in the current world championship match.


The two 1.d4 games have been Bf4 queens gambit declined, in current WC match. It is by far the most common choice of defending 1.d4 in world championship matches. It makes sense for every level of player to know something about it, because typical pawn structures occur in most straightforward manner, which occur in more complicated opening like Nimzo and Semi-slav.