queens gambit declined

I don't think that 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 cxd5 is played very often, but there are a number of books that suggest cxd5 a little later - something like this: 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 cxd5.

I follow the chess teacher John Bartholomew online and IIRC he once called the Queen's Gambit Accepted "an underrated opening". He didn't elaborate at the time, so I don't know exactly what he meant, but my guess is that accepting the gambited pawn doesn't give white any immediate advantage, but since white probably expected it would be declined, that when playing against an amateur the surprise factor of accepting the gambit might be enough to give black a temporary edge psychologically.

When you say "take the pawn" I assume you mean by White on third move, as listed by kindaspongey.
Lets look at the evidence. I examined 3 game databases, one of my own & two online, all Masters or higher. After 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6
3 cxd5 played 3.4 % of games score = 40 Average of the three databases.
'score' is winning percentage, ie. percent wins + half of the percent draws.
By comparison 3 Nf3 has winning percentage of 58 % and 3 Nc3 57 % .
Stockfish 10 at 26 ply rates 3 cxd5 tie with 3 e3 at 5th & 6th choices. Nf3 & Nc3 were 1st & 2nd,
although engines are a poor way to evaluate opening moves.
As SJS1971 pointed out, there is often an exchange of these pawns later .

I follow the chess teacher John Bartholomew online and IIRC he once called the Queen's Gambit Accepted "an underrated opening". He didn't elaborate at the time, so I don't know exactly what he meant, but my guess is that accepting the gambited pawn doesn't give white any immediate advantage, but since white probably expected it would be declined, that when playing against an amateur the surprise factor of accepting the gambit might be enough to give black a temporary edge psychologically.
He was talking about white playing 3.cxd5.

Queen's Gambit, Declined, Accepted, etc - Introduction....
https://simplifychess.com/queens-gambit/index.html#queens-gambit-accepted
https://simplifychess.com/pawn-structures/queens-gambit-family/home.html
Introduction to Queen's Gambit Accepted .....Jim's Chess Channel on YouTube....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T94C4JwxRk4
Abby Marshall's tutorial articles on the Queens Gambit Accepted...
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627130153/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/abby16.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627073834/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/abby17.pdf
A couple of good books specifically dealing with The Queen's Gambit Accepted...
The Queen's Gambit Accepted: A Sharp and Sound Response to 1 d4 by Chris Ward...(has good explanatory prose)...
https://www.amazon.com/Queens-Gambit-Accepted-Response-Batsford/dp/0713484675/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=queens+gambit+accepted+chris+ward&qid=1572320971&s=books&sr=1-1
How to Beat 1 d4 by James Rizzitano....(very light on explanatory prose; heavy on detailed variations)...
https://www.amazon.com/How-Beat-d4-James-Rizzitano/dp/1904600336/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=how+to+beat+1+d4&qid=1572321064&s=books&sr=1-1
Two instructive, introductory books on the Queen's Gambit Declined....(both with excellent explanatory prose)...
Starting Out: Queen's Gambit Declined by Neil McDonald...
https://www.amazon.com/Starting-Out-Queens-Gambit-Declined/dp/1857444264/ref=sr_1_18?keywords=queen%27s+gambit&qid=1572316130&s=books&sr=1-18
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627005627/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen93.pdf
Queen's Gambit Declined by Matthew Sadler...
https://www.amazon.com/Queens-Gambit-Declined-Matthew-Sadler/dp/1857442563/ref=sr_1_15?keywords=queen%27s+gambit&qid=1572316048&s=books&sr=1-15
more openings articles in the ChessCafe archives.....(search especially 'The Openings Explained by Abby Marshall')...
Chess Openings Resources for Beginners and Beyond...
https://www.chess.com/blog/RussBell/openings-resources-for-beginners-and-beyond

QGA is perfectly solid if played right. I prefer to play against it than against QGD because hardly anybody knows how to play the QGA. Same with the Slav.
... I examined 3 game databases, one of my own & two online, all Masters or higher. After 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6
3 cxd5 played 3.4 % of games score = 40 Average of the three databases.
'score' is winning percentage, ie. percent wins + half of the percent draws.
By comparison 3 Nf3 has winning percentage of 58 % and 3 Nc3 57 % .
Stockfish 10 at 26 ply rates 3 cxd5 tie with 3 e3 at 5th & 6th choices. Nf3 & Nc3 were 1st & 2nd,
although engines are a poor way to evaluate opening moves.
As SJS1971 pointed out, there is often an exchange of these pawns later .
I think the usual QGD concept is (or, at least, was) for White to try to exploit Black's pawn on e6 as an obstacle to the development of the c8 bishop. Of course, cxd5 allows Black to open up the c8-h3 diagonal. Nevertheless, cxd5 seems to have come to be thought of as a move with merit for white, although not, as far as I am aware, as a choice for move three.
I would take that as a reference to playing the white pieces (after 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6).
I would take that as a reference to white ("me") playing cxd5 ("taking a centre pawn").
Out of curiosity what is blacks most common response to the queens gambit? I’m pretty sure it’s not 2. e5 which is what I always play

Alexei Kornev's practical repertoire recommends the exchange variation. I think that a fair few do. If that is what you want to play, should find lots of info on it.



When u play 3.cxd5 and u get the reply 3... exd5 that pawn structure is very famous and instructive. The pawn structure is the pawn skeleton, how the whole position looks with only pawns. It would be good for u to look at some vids on that structure. It would help ur opening study enormously to learn the pawn structures that r associated with it. Those pawn structures r a road map to strategical planning. It'll make it a lot easier.
Queen's Gambit pawn structures...
https://simplifychess.com/pawn-structures/queens-gambit-family/home.html
It is natural to think that when faced with books that seem so definite about this or that. However, my impression is that, in many cases, common practice is justified primarily by lots of experimentation that can not be easily compressed into a quick explanation.
I just remembered that IM John Watson seems to like to write about this sort of issue. In this case, he wrote (2007) so much, that there is no way that I am going to copy it all here, but here is some of it:
"... the Exchange Variation of the Queen's Gambit … is the most popular choice of all … That variation normally begins with [1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6] 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 cxd5 exd5. Is there any reason why White wouldn't want to play the immediate 3 cxd5 exd5 … instead? The answer is that from the resulting position White cannot force a transposition into that form of Exchange Variation. This requires a fairly complicated digression. … if White tries to get to that position by 3 cxd5 exd5 4 Nc3, Black can choose moves other than 4...Nf6. The most useful of these is probably 4...c6. Then of course White cannot play 5 Bg5?? without losing the bishop. …"