I stand corrected. In the line in question BxN should preceed Qb3, as stated by Pellik and Conzipe. The double attack on the b and d pawns is something I've never had the pleasure of, and might not've had I remained in error.
Queens Gambit Declined Question
Sort:
6.... Bf5 is bad for black and white wins more than 80% of the games after 7 Bxf6 Bxf6 8 Qb3 and only 64% with the immediate 7 Qb3 Nuff Said
In the QGD, one idea a side can adopt as well in a game is to attack the squares a LSB has vacated covering just recently (i.e. Qb3). this is especially so if Black were to adopt in some way, 2.... Bf5 (Baltic Defense). While Qb3 is not a full refutation of this line, it is pretty straight forward.
Kasparov said something to the effect that most QGD opening theory rests on how Black can get his c8-Bishop into play.
Also, if Black chooses a Bf5 line, do not be woried about Bxb1 as there is not only the recapture but some nice opening exchanges that leave White with a nice pawn center and Bishops pair and is enough compensation as well.
Musicalhair is correct in his assessment of Bf5 as well. If your opponent weakens squares and you can hit at them without loss of tempo in the opening, so much the better.
The fact that your opponent picked his move order in the Orthodox or Capablanca System (not sure as I don't have access to my book right now) and played exd5, freed up his game somewhat and as of yet, I am uncertain as to how the eventul outcome hinged here.
The QGD probably rivals the Ruy Lopez as the most popular opening of all time so that can say alot for people choosing to play it. How popular? In Alekhine's and Capablanca's world champoinship matches, 32 of 34 matches were some line of the QGD.
Personally OP, I would have taken a safer route than playing Bf5 though it is playable and tried to finalize my development and enter the middle game in a clearer picture for Black but hopefully these posts help you see some of the ideas to try as well in this opening. Good lick in future matches.
This is the right way to play ...Bf5 for Black. Going for the endgame with 7.Qf3 is white's only try for an advantage (7.Qb3 Qb6 or 7.Bxf6?! Qxf6 8.Qb3 Nd7! are nothing), although Black is extremely solid following either 7...Be6 (the Vaganian variation) or 7...Bg6 (the Short variation). Theoretically I believe white has nothing, but in practice Black's fractured kingside pawns may offer white chances for a little something.
White can stop ...Bf5 with 6.Qc2 instead of 6.e3, but this move is also not without shortcomings.
Thanks for all the comments
This is the clever way to exploit the lack of control over h5 introduced by Qc2. NOT mentioned in any theory book.
IMHO Black is just fine, no problems at all. I have been in great pains to find even a very tiny advantage for white here- to no avail. White has nothing.
White's only real try for an advantage in that variation is playing the 6.e3 Bf5 7.Qf3 etc endgame variation, which objectively is just equal. Just easier to play as white, but that's all- his positional advantage is largely symbolic.
All that means that 3...Nf6 is by no means inferior to Alatortsev's 3...Be7. Probably 3...Be7 is a better choice if Black wants to play for a win (since the endgame mentioned above is really difficult to play for a win as Black) but just that.
I am finding this immensely interesting...
I'm curious though- would Ne2 not be a good move for white in this position? Does white really have nothing in this position?
Also, in the first position that we see on this forum, would Nb5 not be a good alternative to Qc6?
Then again... after analyzing that.. maybe not
Black can aim at developing the c8 bishop early, but in that case 5...c6 is certainly more exact than 5...Be7.