[quote author=IMJohnCox link=1169477997/0#1 date=1169479131]It doesn’t have a simple answer at all, I fear.

So the game starts 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6.


If you play 3 Nc3 then 3…c6 is a problem since you either have to play 4 Nf3 and allow the Abrahams (aka the Noteboom) with 4…dxc4, or 4 e3 allowing a Meran with Nc3 in, which you don’t want, or 4 e4, which is a pretty decent gambit called the Marshall Gambit. Your call. 
   
John, as a 1 d4 player who likes 3 Nc3, you paint a pretty grim picture for White if he expects to get an edge. I have never played against the Noteboom, but just finished reviewing Sherbakov's 8/04 ebook. As of that date, the Noteboom picture does not look too bright for White. 
   I don't know the Meran that well, so I assume that playing it with Nc3 for White is not good. That leaves the Marshall Gambit for White (if he insists on the natural 3 Nc3). Just how good or bad is the Marshall Gambit in your opinion, or should White, playing very high level correspondence chess, just bite the bullet and play 4 e3?

But the elephant in the room that everyone seems to be ignoring (I know it's another topic): as I go through many of the 1 d4 d5 threads, one constant theme: "White must avoid the Abrahams/Noteboom at all costs!"
  Is it really that bad for White? This is Onischuk-Schneider, 2006:
  Onischuk-Schneider

1.c4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 c6 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.e3 b5 6.a4 Bb4 7.Bd2 a5 8.axb5 Bxc3 9.Bxc3 cxb5 10.b3 Bb7 11.bxc4 b4 12.Bb2 Nf6 13.Bd3 Nbd7 14.0-0 0-0 15.Re1!?
  Certainly a sharp, unbalanced line, but should White really twist himself into contortions and avoid the ML QGD with 3 Nc3 just because of the specter of the Noteboom?

True. I think we have now reached the point where everyone is agreeing vigorously.

They can't really play the QGD Exchange at all, Alias - it doesn't work where Nf3 is played too early. But yes of course, if you are meeting the QGD with Nf3/Nc3 at moves three and four then it doesn't matter which is first.

IMJohnCox wrote on 01/26/07 at 10:42:09:

Ah thanks, so I missed point 2.
Move-orders and transpositions in the 1.e4 openings are 2nd nature to me, but with 1.d4 (or c4 or Nf3) they are sometimes a bit of a blur. 

PS You may be interested to hear that with this week's rapid I had great success with your lines in the KID and Marshall. Especially the latter blew black away (Ba5 is really a move to remember).

Markovich wrote on 01/25/07 at 18:02:32:

I think we somehow misunderstand indeed. What I mean is that after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 when you normally play 3.Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 you will later play Nf3 anyway. That means that in your move order via 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 the sequence 3.Nf3 d5 isnt such a big deal since Nf6 is already played and white will go Bg5/Nc3 later on. What I wonder is if I miss a certain variation as I dont see anything.

Markovich wrote on 01/23/07 at 15:25:30:

I dont quite understand this. I agree if you play lines vs the QGD in which you withhold either move for a while such as with the exchange, but I dont see how it matters if you play the main lines QGD with Bg5 and the semislav with Nc3 and Nf3. So am I missing something here?

Korchnoi has a game with it (as Black, bizarrely) in his Best Games book. He says that he may not have won every game he played with 8 Be3, but he had the advantage in all of them.