Thanks slates. Will keep your points in mind.

Hi Gabriel,

The one thing I might question about your thinking would be that you say the QGD is much more theory intensive;  as a rank beginner I started with the QGD as I was advised (and still believe) that it's easier to learn and apply than the QGA.  The QGD pretty much plays itself against most White players, although you run the risk of being left in passive positions.  You also have the other side of that argument in your favour though, in that White players will often overpress against you when trying to break through.  I suppose the Catalan might be a deterrant to playing the QGD, but not many 'lower rated players' will use it (in my experience), whilst personally I never liked facing 5Bf4 in the QGD, a line I saw about three times as often as the Catalan.  

However, the Tartakower is great if you can get it.  One more potential issue with the QGD is the Exchange, which, if you aren't comfortable facing it with White's knight on e2, can be avoided by using the Alatortsev move order 3...Be7.  This in itself can lead to a different set of lines but thats another story.  All things considered, i rarely got troubled by these deviations in my own games as a beginner, and most of the time got my Tartakower or something that I was comfortable with.  I don't think as Black you are likely to get creamed using the QGD, you may suffer against stronger players in some slightly passive positions and their knowledge of theory may kill you off (as in most openings if they know lots more of it than you) but generally it's a safe and educational way to play chess.  

However, my feelings about the QGA are slightly different - I think with the QGA you have to play more actively, and I also think you can get killed off much more quickly if you misstep or don't find a good plan.  To echo some other posters on here, White can develop reasonably naturally and suddenly be on top of you, soemthing that isn't as likely in the QGD.  But I do like the QGA as it can also catch unprepared Whites off guard;  I just think that as Black you really need to learn some lines in it (as I'm trying to do currently) to be able to deal with some of White options.

One other point about it - if you look in Raetsky's book (it's also buried in Ward's book on page 136) there's an explanation of the helpful move order  used by Rublevsky - 1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.Nf3 e6 - this limits what you need to know as Black by avoiding the Furman variation and the aggressive Two Knights variation.....

Finally I would suggest that if you intend to use the QGA as a stepping stone to the QGD (and again I would stress that i think this would be better done the other way around!) you make careful preparation for the English and Reti lines etc., stuff that's used to avoid a QGA but which you can often still play a QGD against.  Good luck!

GabrielGale wrote on 05/14/08 at 01:50:47:


OK, I'll offer a few of my thoughts on the various QGA books I own, in the hope they may be of use to you or anyone else looking to buy a book on this opening, but please check the caveat later in the post....

Yes, I think the Ward book does provide a decent enough intro to the QGA.  I'm constantly wrestling with the problem of which defence to employ against 1.d4, and have recently been trying out both the Slav and the QGA again, so I've picked up Ward's book from my shelf where it was unjustly gathering dust.  The theory will need updating, certainly (I've just ordered Semkov's 3rd edition QGA book today), but it provides a nice collection of annotated QGA games at the very least and some good basic instruction to boot.  

Having also bought Rizzitano's excellent  QGA (and other White 2nd moves) repertoire book a while ago, and also Raetsky's QGA Starting Out guide, I'm glad I have Ward as well. His text is clear and the 90 games cover the QGA well for both sides, although there is perhaps some bias for White, particularly in the 3.e4 section, which he obviously feels is critical.  (He also explores this in his later 'Play the Queens Gambit', in a chapter which seemed disproportionately large in the context of some other chapters therein. Still, that's good for anyone thinking of using the QGA or meeting it with 3.e4, and I'd say that alone merits investigation of that book as well as his QGA specific one from 1999.) 

Here's the caveat to all this - I'm not a very strong player at all, and I have the bad habits of both flitting from opening to opening (against 1.d4, anyway) and buying too many chess books, so you should be aware that I haven't read it cover to cover yet, and my opinion (if I gave one) on the theoretical merits of any given lines would be of minimal value in comparison to some of the contributors here.  I've read posts in threads on the QGA by the likes of Semko himself, Inn2, MarinFan, Geoff Strayer and many others which are all very useful and worth tracking down if you're interested in more 'considered' opinions on the defence and/or books about it.  

Meanwhile I would simply say that it's worth getting the Ward book if you can still find it - depending upon your level it will probably serve you well in many of the lines.  At my own level I don't imagine White will be prepared to the extent that that he will beat me with more recent theory very often; it seems the QGA catches many White players by surprise, oddly enough, whilst my attempts at various Slavs are usually met rather more convincingly  
 
Still, as I said earlier I'm a chess book junkie so having the Sakaev/Semkov book to hand will make me comfortable in the theory corner, too - plus, it will give me some more coverage on 3.e4 Nc6, a line I'd like to investigate more.  
To make a comparison here, using 3.e4 Nc6, there's very skimpy coverage in the Raetsky book with three complete games compared to the ten games in Ward - this is an example of how Ward's book is still worth getting and although the target audience of Raetsky's Starting Out book may be a little lower than Ward's, the page count of 172 versus Ward's 160 is deceptive; the Ward book has double column spacing, the Raetsky doesn't, Ward has 90 games, Raetsky 51.  However, Raetsky does have more basic introductions to the lines and more handholding. I'm glad I have them both.

Rizzitano, meanwhile, is repertoire and so only gives certain lines for Black, but has a great deal more theory than either Ward or Raetsky. 
His book is also extremely well organised, as you might expect from a Gambit title, and uses the variation tree approach rather than the complete game approach of Ward and the Starting Out title. 

As mentioned previously, you shouldn't really be without the Rizzitano title if you want to know how to meet any of White's second move alternatives to c4 - he covers pretty much everything, but is a little short on 2.Bf4 in the London system, if you really had to find any fault at all.  Again, I suppose it depends upon your level - this hasn't troubled me much as I rarely face this line and besides, most of my games will be decided by my tactical mistakes rather than move order issues   

It seems that Semko's book is similarly dense but aimed at a higher rated player, although in a review of it in NIC Glenn Flear wrote that he felt it was a very good practical guide for players of all levels, if I recall correctly, so maybe all are worth having  

Anyway, owning all these books and talking about them has reminded me that I need to get down to some hard study of them, so I'll try to do just that now.  Good luck!

Semko wrote on 05/09/08 at 15:13:52:


This is very exciting news!  I'll be looking out for this...

My personal feeling is that 3...e5 is objectively the best answer, but I have never played it as Black. For a club level 3...Nc6 seems more promising. Well, Baburin, who plays it regularly, admits that positionally it is a bit dubious, and I agree. But we are not playing against Karpov or Smyslov (at least not every day...), do we?! I think that Black has a fair amount of counterplay there.
As for a pdf with updates, I'm afraid, it is not possible. Most pages are changed, except some totally off-topic lines.
I definitely do not plan a 4th edition, but instead Chess Stars is planning a repertoire book, based on the Vienna variation (and a repertoire against the Catalan). That would be a sharper choice for Black. However there is not a single line written yet... only variations.

[/quote]

Hey, why not try then the relatively new book on this opening by GM Konstantin Sakaev titled  "The Queen's Gambit Accepted", 3rd edition sold at London Chess Centre and priced at around 20 GBP. Why, it's still a good deal! The book seems to have been positively acclaimed with chess reviewers.
http://www.ukgamesshop.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=chnew...
[/quote]
Why, because I upgraded from the 1st ed to the 2nd only to learn there is a 3rd ed. I think I will wait for the 4th or 5th ed.

I was looking for a pdf of the changes (a la the Sharpest Sicilian) but did not see any. Perhaps Semko can indicate if there such a thing.

I've often thought that the QGA would be an excellent choice for a club player to specialize in.  I hardly ever face it; it seems to lag behind the KID, Grunfeld, QGD, Slav, Semi-Slav, Benoni, and Dutch in popularity!  I probably see the Chigorin, Albin, and Budapest more often (or about as often) as the QGA.  Anyone else have similar experiences?

MarinFan wrote on 04/12/08 at 09:11:33:


Good grief, there's a third edition?!  I already bought the first two.  They should sell subscriptions, for crying out loud.  Or print it on ring binder sheets.  Or offer an upgrade discount for owners of version 1.2.