Thank you for responding, MNb.  I do think I'm beating a dead horse here, but it would be nice if a couple of other people responded as well.

MNb wrote on 04/15/08 at 01:44:22:


I guess this is the crux of the whole matter.  If we think that 7.Qc2 c6 is inferior to 7.Qc2 c5, then of course you are absolutely correct.  I'm not certain this is the case, however.  I know that older sources recommend 7...c5, and I know that Kasparov (and others like Korchnoi and Kramnik) played some great games in this line as White.  However, I thought that it was partly on the basis of these games that the line with 7.Qc2 c5 is now thought to be slightly better for White, and that the alternative 7...c6 has gained in popularity over the last 10-15 years or so.  I'm actually at work right now  , but I can do more research on this when I get home.  Essentially, I am under the impression that the "modern" interpretation of the Orthodox QGD says that 7.Qc2 c6 is just as good--and possibly more complex--than 7.Qc2 c5.  I concede that if 7...c6 is truly inferior here, then playing 7.Qc2 in the Semi-Slav move order is at least as good as playing 7.Bd3.

MNb wrote on 04/15/08 at 01:44:22:


I must also agree that, after looking at it a bit more last night, it's not clear to me that 7.Bd3 and 8.0-0 (in the Semi-Slav move order) are better moves to play than 7.Qc2 and 8.0-0-0.  However, this is largely because the position with opposite-side castling is fairly complex and hence hard to evaluate without looking at long variations, whereas 7.Bd3 intending 8.0-0 seems to keep a nice, safe edge for White.

Regarding your last two points:
1.  In essence, I am disputing that 7.Qc2 c6 is inferior, but I could be wrong.
2.  It's true that after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 c6 5.Bg5 Be7 6.e3 0-0 7.Qc2 White has avoided the 7...c5 line.  But I am making the same argument in favor of 7.Bd3: White has avoided the 7...dxc4 8.Bxc4 c5 line.  So in which case does White gain more?  I am inclined to think that 7.Bd3 (developing a kingside piece) must be a more useful move, but perhaps this is prejudice.

Maybe the two moves are equally as strong?  Anyway, thank you for the response.

MNb wrote on 04/14/08 at 18:50:51:


But my point is precisely that, in the Orthodox variation 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e3 0-0 6.Nf3 Nbd7 7.Qc2, Black does not need to play 7...c5 to reach a playable game.  Isn't 7...c6 now a main line of the Orthodox variation?  I don't see any way to avoid this transposition to a "regular" Orthodox QGD after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 e6 5.Bg5 Be7 6.e3 0-0 7.Qc2 Nbd7.  Right??

I'm sorry if I'm beating a dead horse, but I'm interested in getting to the truth of this.  Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that:

1)After 5.Bg5 Be7 6.e3 0-0 7.Qc2 (or 7.Rc1) Nbd7, we have transposed directly to a standard line of the Orthodox defence.  This is probably slightly better for White, but we haven't punished Black for his move order.
2) After 5.Bg5 Be7 6.e3 0-0, White can stop with the "battle for the tempo" and play 7.Bd3! immediately, because Black's standard counter of ...dxc4 and ...c5 would now lose a tempo.  After 7.Bd3!, it seems to me that Black cannot reach a standard Orthodox QGD; hence we have punished him for his inaccurate move order.  Think of it like this: if we can get away with playing 7.Bd3 and 8.0-0, without allowing Black to equalize, aren't these much more useful moves than 7.Qc2 and 8.Rd1, or 7.Rc1 and 8.a3, for instance?

I hope someone either corroborates my thinking or else explains to me where I've gone wrong.  These positions are so fundamental to chess that it's important to me that I understand them correctly.

I'd like to get back to the position after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 e6 5.Bg5 Be7, if I may.  It is my understanding that the only way for White to take advantage of this move order is with 7.Bd3!, i.e. 6.e3 0-0 7.Bd3!.  The reason can be seen if we look at the Orthodox move order:

1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e3 0-0 6.Nf3 Nbd7.  Now 7.Bd3 of course looks like the most obvious and natural choice for White, but Black has the freeing maneuvre 7...dxc4 8.Bxc4 c5!, when Black has approximately equalized.  In the line given above with the Semi-Slav move order, Black doesn't have this luxury as he's played ...c6 instead of ...Nbd7.

It is my understanding that 7.Bd3! is the only way to take advantage of the Semi-Slav move order.  Also, I don't see any reason why after 7.Rc1 or 7.Qc2 (as advocated by Markovich) Black cannot transpose directly back into an Orthodox QGD position.

Is my understanding of this position correct, or am I missing something?

Nothing wrong with getting an endgame if you feel comfortable with in. Imho, endgame expertise is the most underused weapon (ie I don't have it ) ever. So if you are good at it and you are beating your opponents in that phase of the game...why, you are playing like Kramnik  .

Markovich: Please read the thread. Jon asked for a simple semi-slav repertoire for an upcoming tournement, changed his mind to the regular slav, but regretted that decision due to the exchange variation.

Markovich wrote on 02/09/08 at 13:33:41:



Now, now - no need for that ... 

why not play a nimzo/benoni combination,
they are not as theoretical as semislav.