Queen's Gambit

Hi! Swtiched to QA from Spanish and I think I like the QA, not sure though. When I study the french, I have a large book containing all variations, which I check with after game to see if or where I deviated from theory. I could not find such a book on this topic. So, how can I get better at QA? I thnik it's really easy to develop, but playing, espeically against the slav, I have no ideas on what to do, except a minority attack. What do I need to know about the opening? How can I get more studymateriel? Or should I just play and analyze with computer and skipping all the books?

I've searched, but I only find some "Starting out" look alike books and I want more advanced, even though I am not advanced in this opening. I find those books leving me with too much doubt and questions

Do you go to Kenilworth Chess Club in NJ? 

The book by Chris Ward is interesting for the accepted line: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Play-Queens-Gambit-Chris-Ward/dp/1857444116/ref=sr_1_10?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1457565992&sr=1-10&keywords=queens+gambit 

The recommendation to push to e4 rather than e3 in particular.

Possibly helpful:

A Strategic Chess Opening Repertoire for White by John Watson (2012), Playing 1.d4 by Lars Schandorff (2012), The Kaufman Repertoire for Black & White by Larry Kaufman (2012), and A Cunning Chess Opening Repertoire for White by Graham Burgess (2013).

https://web.archive.org/web/20140627105428/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen161.pdf

https://web.archive.org/web/20140626221508/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen162.pdf

http://theweekinchess.com/john-watson-reviews/john-watson-book-review-110-repertoires-in-the-age-of-carlsen

If you want good books on Slav, Semi-Slav, QGD and GQA then go for Matt Sadler.

Matt Sadler has a very childish way of writing Q and A. It becomes more of fiction than a chess book 

@storfiskarn ??

Matthew Sadler's "The queen's gambit declined", is seen at the most instructive book about this opening.

He wrote books for children, but this one is not for children...

I have an old book on the queens gambit by Sergiu Samarian that I like very much . 

If you have the opininon that Q and A format is instructive, then good for you. I, however, stated that I do not like that kind of format becasue it requires so much text for so short Q's. And, I have other questions than those in the book. 

then u shouldnt be 1466 if u think this book is not enough for you...

Because online rating maters in a sport designed to be played OTB, right? 

However, I did not say it was not enough for me, (well, indirect I might have said that), but the point was that his way of writting is completly rubbish for me. I do not get out anything good from it. HOwever, a more in my view more properly written book would prove to give much better results. 

And for the second time: I think it is very funny that you use ones online chess rating as a reference to how strong that player is in chess. That if something, is childish. 

i know titled players, FM, IM, who are fond of this book and tells they learn with it everything almost they have to know at their level...

I don't like online rating, but i don't know your "real" rating and being 1466 online shows u are not a titled player, or at least a +2000 rated players...

Maybe it doesn't make sense when you have a low rating... that higher rated players are better or know more.

But when you have a higher rating, you realize that lower rated players aren't as good as you lol.

So based on that high-level player has use of it, that automaticly makes me in use of it? Have you ever heard of that people learn differently? And what says I do not already know the things in the book and not just bad at other parts of the game? You can not say that it is a good book just because some of the people you know says it great for them...Basic logic, do not know if you know it or not

@ Storfiskarn : sorry but this book is supposed to be the reference on this opening.

Its not told only by friends (at all level), but by everyone (except you), it is a fact.

Ok u don't lke this book, but those reading this thread could be interested...

For black or fr white? Check it my QGD games as black on chess.com

I have a hard time beliving it is a reference book since it is a Q and A book, but I can't say anything about it becasue I haven't read it. Even if, what you say, everyone like the book except me, does not makes me like it just becasue of that. And here is a fact; You have to like the book in order to gain anything from it.

I strongly disagree.

I think a lot of players don't improve because they're unwilling to look at ideas, openings, phases of the game, etc that they "don't like." Don't let your preferences be a road block. 

I know this is a little different. We're talking about the format of a book.

But instruction from a conceptual point of view (instead of a database dump of lines) is pure gold. I ordered the book yesterday.

And by the way, one reviewer said it's a game collection (100+ GM games). Looking inside (an amazon feature) I see there are some brief question and answer parts to communicate the concepts (this looks very appealing, like you get to talk to the a author) but there are also plenty of games with analysis.

I will never understand this tendency to teach children, for them, drawish lines. From the child's point of view.