I prefer playing 1...c6 cos I play Slav . I am also quite happy if White plays 2.e4 because I like the positions that arises, especiallt the positions when Black sacs a pawn. Black gets great activity

I would say this is a question of taste - there are many English players who are quite happy to enter QGD, but then are quite unhappy to find they get outplayed 

Solid defence - how about the double fianchetto . Adorjan and Kasparov have played this so it must be ok !

Andrew

Personally i play the KID as well as the English. Even though i am enthousiastic about both openings, i am not so keen on playing the KID against the English because White can aim for d2-d3 (instead of d2-d4) and play on the Queenside (unless Black plays Nbd7 when White can play d2-d4 to transpose into the variation of the Fianchetto KID that many KIDers hate). Anyway, when White plays d3 followed by b4-b5, etc, i have found that it is easier to play the position with White as Black has to find a checkmate that is harder to attain than normal KID in order to justify his wrecked Queenside. 
Finally, Black also has to prepare for the Botvinnik System (lethal in an experienced English player) as well as several systems involving e3 or d3&e3. 

But this is just my two cents.

I was wondering can anyone tell me the name of that russian hedgehog book. I had been interested in the hedgehog for quite a while but whenever i flick through the Suba book, i just end up saying to myself: "Why do you need to prepare against the English? Hardly anyone plays it and you play is so you can just use your experience to fight against it...Mmm a game on playchess sounds good  "

I think an English Botvinnik Setup as black could be a solid weapon against Eglish
even if there would be some problem in order to avoid an early d4 by white.

I invite you to view the new topic about this interesting  plan.

[quote author=Dinomike100 link=1149934999/0#0 date=1149934998]
Is black's position after the 1. ...e5 reply better or worse than white's position in the Sicilian? [/quote]

Mutual Zugzwang.

Hello, 

Botvinnik played many games with

1. c4 e6  2. Nf3 d5  3. b3 --> and possibly following up with a double fianchetto. 
 
and
 
1. c4 c6  2. Nf3 d5  3. b3.

Kasparov played the first line or something like it in a must win situation in a WC match against Karpov.
      So both lines are quite decent, although black should be able to keep equal changes with best play. The main point with such lines is to keep the tension and see how opponent plays chess, rather than get into a opening theory memory test.

Bye John S

There's been quite a bit of discussion of the QGD Slav in the QGD section, so I'll try to keep my comments brief.  There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.

If you take a look at the Slav Exchange and weed out all the short draws, you will see that it's a fighting opening that Black has to know very well to survive.  Trading off a single set of pawns should not make a position drawish, but players who want a draw often play the Slav Exchange as a tacit offer of peace.

There are so many ways to play against the Slav for White that it's a wonder it's popular at all below the professional level.  Right now, one way that seems to be getting more time is a type of Semi-Slav for White that goes: 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.e3?! (premature in my opinion) followed by Nf3 and Qc2.   

The play works well in blitz, but I think Black should be able to equalise.  Still, it's relatively untried compared to the Euwe/Morozevich lines.  You will still need to have some idea of what to do against 3...a6, but chess was never meant to be easy.