GabrielGale wrote on 03/11/10 at 01:14:50:
Last night, my second OTB game for the year (90'(40) +30 (finish)), my opponent (white) played the London (?): 1 d4 d5 2 Nf3 e6 3 Bf4 Nf6 Nd2 ......
Similar to Holbox, I have been learning the Tarrasch as my main reply to 1 d4. So, I was making all these up as I went along but I got myself into a tangle (I think mainly my Knights). Sigh! I wish I had a look at GM Prie's guides from ChessPub but there is only so much you can do in limited time.
I am also using Aagaard and Lund as my main book on Tarrasch but unlike Holbox, I have not even got to the last chapters yet and therefore did not know of 3...Bd6
I also did not know of TN's 3...c5 idea.
I played 3...Nc6 (?!)
(cut)
You played 1 d4 d5 2 Nf3 e6 3 Bf4 Nc6?
If so, you might find it helpful to read a book on general opening principles, rather than a specialised manual.
Rule of thumb: as Black, after 1 d4 d5, do not block your c-pawn with your knight unless you have some very specific idea in mind.
The reason is that if White is able to advance his c-pawn and Black is not, then it is as if Black is fighting with one hand tied behind his back.
Furthermore at some stage after developing the minor pieces Black is going to need an open or semi-open file for his rooks. That will generally require a pawn break. After 1 d4 d5, the pawn break ...e5 is hard to execute except as a gambit; in contrast, ...c5 is much easier to support.
[There are defences that break this rule, such as the Chigorin (1 d4 d5 2 c4 Nc6) but they are controversial and very much the exception.]
The whole classical theory of the Queen's Gambit theory is constructed on trying to prevent or discourage Black from playing ...c5.
Modern theory is less dogmatic and more concrete, and we keep finding more and more exceptions to the old classical rules, but nevertheless it is probably better for most inexperienced players to start with the rules rather than the exceptions.