X

Geez, guess it's a good thing I plan on meeting that with 2. ...h6! :D

That move , and even 2. .. f6 (which I think might be even better) , I faced a couple of times. My Bishop has been chased all the way back to g3 , but at a high price : Black's K-side is overextended. White can (and has) castle Q-side and storm the exposed Black King at high speed.

If you want me to , I can post a nice example. A correspondence game I played recently.

I'd play h6 not as part of a kingside expansion with g5, but because the bishop is kicked off the c1-h6 diagonal and after retreating to h4 will have to spend an extra move to get on the h2-b8 diagonal.  If at some point captures (say a knight on f6) then it will be spending 3 tempo to capture a piece that has moved once.  None of this is a dramatic advantage of course, but as black I'd be comfortable.

3.Bf4 is perhaps the best (?) but I'm guessing wont be played by a player who goes 2.Bg5

Also there's a line where forcing it to h4 is part of a tactic (the variation).

@Wafflemeister , that is a nice example game. Don't forget however that White can play 3.Bf4 instead , to keep and eye on e5. After 4.e3 there is no Knight on f3 yet and the White Queen has an open view on some light-squares on the K-side. Sometimes 4.c3 works better for White and even 4.Nbd2 I played a lot.

These moves are all part of a scheme , to make a stonewall on the black squares with your Q-side Bishop out of the chain and your K-side Bishop tugged on d3.

Oh, so 3.Bf4 would be considered by some of these Bg5 players

Good point about the knight not on f3 yet, I didn't think of this option.

Yeah, gambiting the b pawn makes black work a little harder (at least IMO, because I don't want to calculate or deal with an initiative heh).  After 4.c3 or 4.Nbd2 I might just ignore it and try to continue with development.

@Wafflemeister , you asked for it. Here is a game I played with 2. .. f6 and see what happened :

I didn't add much comment and variations . I'll leave it up to you to decide on the quality of the moves played.

Simply masochistic play by black. 3. ...Nc6? (blocking black's c-pawn) is a clearly weak move. 6. ...g4? (devastating black's kingside structure for a one move threat against white's knight... Bad!). After 12. d5! black is toast. Nicely played! 12. ...a6?? just makes things too fast.

He had to try the comical 12. ...Nb8, but white is simply winning after Bxd7+ Qxd7 Qxe4, he's so far ahead in development and black's position has so many holes/targets. (e6, g4, simply an embarrassment of riches! sheesh).

2...f6 as suggested by the computer I can't really believe in this move.  I think I'd play 3.Bd2 saying "prove it to me"

In any case, surely the idea isn't g5 but to play e5.  f6, with g5 and Bg7 seems terrible.

Your e4 temporary sac was a neat move.

I just added a little comment to my game.

@Wafflemeister , I had a look at your game in note #22 and I like to give a suggestion/example for an alternative line. The sacrifice of a poisened pawn.

Albin gambit here.

I like the albin, but I only do good with it in live games.  What about the benko gambit?

QGD complex.  

The Albin sucks if white knows what he's doing, and the Benko is double-edged but completely playable.  

White gets the advantage in pretty much all lines, if he knows the book. Now the question is how large that advantage will be.

Solid Defenses to 1.d4:

Orthodox QGD
Slav
QGA (If you can play positional chess on an open board, not everybody can)
Nimzo-Indian/Queen's Indian
Czech Benoni (1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e5)
Dutch Stonewall and Classical

Most other defenses are more agressive and hence also a lot riskier, like the Leningrad, KID, Grunfeld, Modern Benoni, etc.