Question about the Queen's Gambit

The Queen's Gambit is my main opening with white, but whenever I play it I always feel awkward about the status of my dark-squared bishop. Most times, I'll pin the knight on f6 with Bg5, they'll play h6, I'll move back to h4, blah blah blah but after looking at chess.com analysis it said that blocking in the dark-squared bishop with e3 wasn't a bad idea. If I were to, should my plan be to fianchetto it on the a1-h8 diagonal? For visual representation, this is what I mean. 

move pieces

Yes, if you were to play e3, then putting your bishop on b2 would be the idea. The logic is that Black eventually wants to get his c-pawn to c5, to challenge your central d4 pawn.

When that happens, the central pawns will be in tension and the center will eventually open up, leaving your b2 bishop placed well to eye the center along the long diagonal.

And if Black doesn't manage to challenge White's center with ...c5, then White can pursue other plans ... such as exchanging on d5 and then using the semi-open c-file for piece play. Or perhaps advancing with e3-e4 when the time is right. Depends on what Black is doing.

Bg5 or Bb2 are just different ways to develop. One isn't necessarily "better" than the other, since there aren't any immediate tactics available. They just lead to different middlegames.

Sure, but the only time you will see Nc6 here is from a terrible opponent. blacks main idea in this opening is to play c5.

Bg5 is generally considered, since the late 19th Century, to be the most active place to develop the QB. These days, a lot of people are playing it to f4, but while this is OK, is seems to be aimed at Q-side play (c7) instead of destabilizing black's center/kingside. Playing an early e3, blocking in the B, is one way to handle the position, though then it needs to go to b2 or even a3. The super lame Nc6 in your game example shows that black there doesn't know how to handle the closed game in general.

Nc6 in d-Pawn openings isn't a great move, but it's probably not as bad as its reputation.

It aims for a Pawn break with e6-e5 instead of c7-c6.

Another point of the Bb2 fianchetto is to play the Pillsbury Attack (Ne5 followed by f4) when the Bishop at b2 is well placed to support the Pawn on e5.

The way to understand concrete opening is to study grandmaster games opened with it, To learn about queen gambit you can study games of for example: Tarrash, Rubinstein, Botvinnik, matches Capablanca - Alekhine, Karpov - Kasparov, Kramnik - Kasparov, Kramnik - Topalov, Anand - Kramnik, Anand - Topalov etc. etc. Nobody can undestand openings and generally improve in chess without studying grandmaster games.

By the way, maybe i am too harsh, but if you condider playing e3 befor developing c1 bishop even for one second, it means yoj know absolurely nothing about queens gambit.

Aha, you meant queens gambit accepted, there is a line with e3 without developing bishop. I was thinking about queens gambit declined.

As you correctly wrote the whole sense of the queens gambit is to pressure pawn d5 and developing bishop to g5 is integral part of it. If you hate exchanging bishop for knight f6, play another opening, queens gambit is not for you.

I'd say it depends on the reasoning.

If a player is rushing to e3 because aren't aware that Bg5 is the main line, then they would certainly do well to learn a bit more about the QG.

But if a player chooses e3 because they intentionally want to deviate and stroll into Colle waters? Then I'd say it's completely fine.

A lot of chess these days is about recognizing that it's a draw any way you slice the pie - so it's less about finding the optimal line, and more about prodding at your opponent with different variations and structures, to see which path(s) they might struggle with the most.

Given the choice, I'll usually choose the less popular/less known approach.

In the game in the opening post - black played Nc6 on his fourth move - blocking his c7 pawn.
Such Nc6 play - in good games - is more common in e4 e5 games.
In games featuring d4 by white and d5 by black both very very early in the game -
black often benefits by getting his c-pawn in the game early- instead of blocking it with the knight.
black often plays his b-knight to d7 instead - or to c6 only after his c7 pawn has moved and is somehow not on c6 (that part obvious) ..
Note that the c7-pawn having moved - mobilizes black's queen.
And c4 in the Queen's gambit mobilizes white's queen.
---------------
I read in an opening book a long while back that in the queen's gambit - white often gets any of five types of advantage.
Superior development - Qside bind - minority attack - Kside attack with pawns and Kside attack with pieces.
Huge idea in the Q's gambit. Black can prevent it.
And does. 1) - Nf6! and others.

Bg5 is NOT mandatory for White in the QGD,

It's a line. But e3 (leaving the Bishop on c1) is also a line. Against the Slav Defense (an early c6 by Black), it's the MAIN line.

In the queen's gambit accepted - black's not supposed to try to hold onto his extra pawn.
Usually. And he'll get in trouble if he does. Usually.
So he allows it to be recaptured.
But in the Slav - its somewhat different.
In the Slav Black already has c6 in. And he hasn't used a tempo with e6 yet.
Which blocks his c-bishop if he has.

Blueemu:

1.Yes, in QGA e3 is one of main lines. But OP posted line in QGD.

2.Yes, Bg5 id of course not mandatory in QGD, but definitely is most principled. Bf4 (according to Caruana, who said it in one of hist podcasts) is now considered equal after c5. I can imagine that players like Rapport or Mamedyarov would play e3 in QGD, but i think even them would not claim white can reach an advantage.

3.Yes, in Slav e3 is most common move, but iwhen i talk about QGD i do not mean Slav, i consider those two different openings.

Post #9.

Noteboom Slav is a draw? I guess Nxe5 Berlin is forced win then.

Well, i dont think that bishop to b2 is a good idea. Instead of bishop b2 i think Ke5 is better.