QGD Question

It's not uncommon.

Look at who has played it.

I was going by this: https://youtu.be/Av5xfMtwNSE?si=zLBj3Uf2rwJWJLST

See timestamp 1 minute 15 seconds. I mean even if it's not uncommon, Be7 is still far more common (and I don't know why).

In the last 10-15 years Bd6 has been played far more often at top level, here and in other lines like the Janowsky with a6 instead of c6. That said Bd6 has drawbacks : you probably will have to play h6 once White lines up with Bd3 and Qc2 (and h6 is not ideal, it cuts several plans out) and possibly also a6 or a5 if you want to play Qc7. The Bd6 might also be a bit misplaced if White manages to play e4 or f3-e4 under good conditions. Still, Bd6 is a fine move overall.

But my main argument would be : it's not because a piece looks active that this piece does actually something useful. This struck me when I was looking at the line 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Be7 4. cxd5 exd5 5. Bf4 c6 6. e3 Bf5 7. g4 Be6 from the white side; it looks like White should play Bd3 quickly and make good use of having kicked the black bishop away from the nice diagonal. But actually, when going through the concrete lines, one realizes the bishop is actually more useful on e2 90% of the time and at high depth 8. Bd3 is not even in the top 5 moves of the engine.

The other problem with cxd5 is that if Black chooses to take back with the Knight, now you are looking at the potential of a Grunfeld if e4 Nxc3, Nxc3. Also, you take away the possibility of getting a Tarrasch Defense and the potential IQP positions that Black must now contend with. While I get that Black plays Bd6 at high levels from the position, it seems in my opinion that White lets Black off the hook by opening the board this soon. In the QGD, c6 is a big target that White can focus on after solid development. Why make Black's job easier?

The only thing that I can add to this discussion is that the book "The Modernized Queens Gambit Declined: A Dynamic Repertoire for Black" by Luis Rodi focuses on the 6...Bd6 line in his coverage on the Queens Gambit Declined.

Probably because playing an early Be7 provokes White into playing Nf3, before developing the Bg5, thus sidestepping Kasparov's flexible variation, it's not so much feared now because Black has found the resources to defend against it.. but back in the 90s and early 2000s it was very topical and White scored well.

Of course playing an early Be7 ... i.e 1.d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Be7 Black as to be prepared play a sharp variation called "The Alatortsev Variation" 

e.g. 4.cxd5 exd5 5. Bf4

A) 5...c6

B) 5...Nf6

Thank you everybody

Not a good post.

3. ...Be7 is the Alatortsev Variation. Black doesn't have to be prepared to play it. Don't bother now claiming this is what you meant the whole time.

The Alatortsev Variation isn't very sharp, actually the main point is to prevent the f3 system which people would consider sharper than Nf3. Unable to play Bg5 white runs out of moves and has to play Nf3, so can no longer play f3 in good time.

You're saying "an early Be7 is to induce white to play Nf3" - no, that is specifically only Be7 before Nf6 where white runs out of good moves for the f3 variation. The f3 system was Botvinnik's, not Kasparov's.

Really? dude ... You should get some sleep ... either you are too tired to read, don't know that you don't know, or are so full of yourself that you didn't comprehend what I wrote (hence stupid)

which is it?

A) Alatortsev Variation is indeed vary sharp... why don't you look up the Hanging Pawns vid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYcpOngiS2A&t=840s

pay attention to the "Aggressive Kingside Attacks are Common" and played at the higher levels more often due to it's complexity!!!!

"the f3 system which people would consider sharper than Nf3." Ummm bro... that is the Kasparov flexible exchange system!

From The Queen's Gambit & Catalan for Black by GM Lasha Janigava

Quote: (The Alatortsev Variation) it's point is to provoke White into playing Nf3 before developing the bishop to g5 thus render the Exchange Varation harmless. pg 6 (referring to if Nf3 is played the Kasparov's Flexible Exchange Variation can not be played)

and Finally... the f3 system is NOT THE BOTVINIK EXCHANGE !!!!

https://papachess.com/openings/queens-gambit-declined-orthodox-defense-botvinnik-variation

does that look like the f3 system ??

does it?

SO which is it?

To tired to read ?

didn't know that you didn't know (but trolled anyway??? )

or 

 so full of yourself that you didn't comprehend what I wrote (hence stupid) 

I'm not tired at all.

I'm not going to a video you posted, I said that in fact the Alatortsev is not sharp at all, which is completely true.

I'm not confusing anything. f3 in the qgd is well known as Botvinnik's idea by anyone with even a casual interest in the queen's gambit.

Something's wrong with you. Stop making up nonsense.

To totally ignore a video that smashes your comments... and a link that shows you what the Botvink variation in the QG Exchange var is... ??? Wow that's some kind of special logic your demonstrating.

Do you think .... If you just ignore the truth that your troll comments won't look ignorant, foolish and conceded? LOL... Honestly... I would have just slunk away and not responded.. (and took the admonishment...)

So you if you are not tired...

and not confused...

I do believe that leaves the last option...

The main line (which features g4) in the Aletortsev is widely known for being sharp. Both kings are staying in the center while both flanks are opening up, the game is getting sharp by any definition. And black makes a major concession if he wants to avoid this, immediately accepting a much worse position than any typical QGD line. He'd have been better off playing the f3 exchange at that point. So yes, it is a sharp line. 
Hanging pawns may be somewhat of a doofus, but he researches and reads thoroughly before he makes his videos, they are reliable sources of information.

Chessbase database has 6...Bd6 as the 4th most popular move.

Please, a little perspective folks. The e2-e3/Ng1-e2 version of the Exchange Variation should be named for neither Botvinnik nor Kasparov. Maybe Alekhine did more than anybody to popularize it.

Against the Alatortsev finesse 3 ... Be7, the plan with 4 cxd5 exd5 5 Bf4 c6 6 e3 Bf5 7 g4 ! does indeed belong to Botvinnik.

About 6...Bd6, like a lot of old moves the engines are forcing a re-evaluation. Pachman (1969) Queen's Gambit doesn't give 6 ... Bd6, but he does say 7 ... Bd6 "is weaker" than 7 ... Be7 based on Spielmann - Capablanca, Carlsbad 1929, giving white a plus after 16 moves.

A current trend places this bishop... nowhere.

Black plays (1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.cxd5 exd5 5.Bg5) 5...Be6, and he usually proceeds with ...Nbd7, c6, h6 and g5 and the king finds shelter on the Queenside.

https://tinyurl.com/2bk3proh

Most of the time people play the Alatortsev white will transpose back into the Queen's gambit with Nf3 - that is the main continuation of the Alatortsev and the point is to avoid f3 as stated.

Botvinnik is the main player that proved its value at the elite stage. Alekhine normally played the conventional Nf3 in all his top games. It's of course no coincidence that Botvinnik is also widely credited with the g4 variation as he needed a convincing response to the Alatortsev, otherwise everyone would just play the Alatortsev move order to this day and his development of the Nge2+f3 system would never see use. Clearly neither black nor white particularly like the g4 variation since black tends to play 3.... Nf6 avoiding it and even when he does play 3.... Be7 White usually just continues with Nf3 or cd5.

In your own words that's usually a transposition out of the Alatortsev back into the QGD, at which point it is the Aletortsev no longer. Most players who play that are going to be QGD Modern or Three Knights players just trying to get back to their position. The people playing the QGD exchange aren't interested in that. They're most often playing cxd5 and staying in the Aletortsev's main line (very sharp). That's the line which offers white the greatest advantage, not withstanding some transpositional benefit. Alternatively they can play Nf3 > Bf4 but that's less common than cxd5.

Am I mistaken here or isn't the purpose of Black typically playing the Bd6 move to trade the Bishops off if White has played his own Bishop to f4? So if White does not play the Bishop to f4 but instead plays to say, g5, doesn't this move actually hurt Black? Maybe I'm missing something since I get mostly 1300-1400 Elo players playing this move to offer an exchange, but I usually see this as a way for Black to try to trade an active for a passive piece which would help him in the middlegame. I've usually looked to steer the endings into a good Knight versus bad Bishop towards the ending but then again, most of my Queen's Gambit games flow into either the Orthodox or Zuckertort Variations and they are really two different beasts from what I see.

At the risk of rehashing a part of the thread already discussed, what are the positional and strategic advantages for the Bd6 move and when is it considered a justifiable move for Black?