There's no wrong answer here, based on the choices you offered, as they're all playable and viable. It's just a matter of asking yourself kind of middlegame positions you prefer.
They're all just different paths up the same mountain - just pick which path you'd enjoy travelling the most.
I like QGD, but what variation? I'm in doubt between Ragozin, Lasker or Tartakower
Lasker's seemed too defensive to me when I was playing it. I had trouble getting used the duo side by side (hanging) pawns when I tried the Tartakower for a little while. I've never played the Ragozin so no comment.
I like the Tarrasch Defense 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 (or 3 Nf3) c5 (instead of 3...Nf6). In return for being willing to accept having an IQP Black gets freedom for his c8 Bishop and control over the e4 square. If Black is outplayed and winds up eventually losing the IQP sometimes he can still hold a draw because of his active pieces and White's extra pawn is often difficult to convert in the resulting pawns setup on both sides. Also, I seem to wind up in a lot of Rook(s) and pawns vs Rook(s) and pawns endings. My King rarely if ever comes under attack, (can that be said about any other defenses?). I recall my King being attacked a couple of times, once because I carelessly played into it, and another time was when I was trying out the so called recent fad 'Dubov way' of playing the Tarrasch Defense.
The reason I mentioned those openings is they blend into one another. I would just learn how to use hanging pawns. Look up: Bertok vs. Fischer then Fischer vs. Spassky game 6, 1972. Then a couple of games by Efem Gelller for the Tartakower. I was always Taught to stick with an opening for a year or one-hundred Tournament games.
you can get 2.c4 consistently as black???
lucky...
#8 if you play D5 against d4, people will frequently play the queen's Gambit. But, if you play nf6, you won't. Even I had this same strategy when I played d4. Catalan against D5 and the trompowsky against nf6
Hot take, but I think the QID is better. 3 d5 in that position will probably lead to the Catalan, where everything is even except that black's bishop is blocked in and white's bishop isn't. ANother option is
And white cant support his knight on f3 with his other knight. Or if he tries to instead of blocking with the bishop it's pinned.
Hot take, but I think the QID is better. 3 d5 in that position will probably lead to the Catalan, where everything is even except that black's bishop is blocked in and white's bishop isn't. ANother option is
And white cant support his knight on f3 with his other knight. Or if he tries to instead of blocking with the bishop it's pinned.
Okay, so this is all either incorrect or mistaken. The QID is not even close to being BETTER than (or depending on who you ask, even as good as) the QGD and were it, it wouldn’t be due to the Catalan.
Also, in the BID, 4. Bd2 to block check is just worse than 4. Nbd2. Even if you do play Bd2, you CERTAINLY don’t just take on b4 for no reason, but say you do, you can finally go support that knight on f3 like you wanted to for some reason. Anyways, 4. Nbd2 b6 5. a3 Bxd2+ 6. Bxd2 and White is doing rather well.
Ethan_Brollier
The Catalan has no advantages whatsoever for black but does have a couple minor one'sfor white, while the QID and BID are just different and equal.
Taking does allow you to support the knight but black now has a semi open file for his rook. In your line Black does not nead to play b6 instead he can play
though b6 is also good because
I'll happily take either side.
Hi!
All of the defenses you mentioned are totally fine so it is a matter of personal taste.
Good luck!
Against D4 I am playing Nimzo Indian, but in several games White plays 3. Nf3 (Anti-Nimzo), after this move what is the best choice for Black, transpose to Queens Gambit Declined with 3. d5 or to Queens Indian with 3 .b6?
What about other options like Bogo or Slav?
The impression I have is that both QGD and QID can lead to similar Nimzo positions, like Ragozin in QGD or QID with late Bb4, which is more interesting?