Ok, thanks for the information. I have tried 3...Nc6 against engines and I still feel happier with 3...e5, so will hold off buying the DVD for now, I think.
I have the Starting Out QGA book and the Rizzitano one too, these will keep me busy for a long time yet, but it's nice to see new QGA material appear, even on unusual lines like Collins' coverage of ...Bg4, as there seems so little of it about.
I don't follow GM games very much but from what I do read and hear, the QGA is pretty unfashionable lately, and perhaps for no really good reason.
I usually play the Slav but keep experimenting with the QGA as I like the fact that many White players seem not to be prepared for it (on ICC at least, I see plenty of 3.Nc3 )  but lazily I never really bothered to learn many lines in it properly either, with the obvious consequence that often I get beaten quickly in games when I do use it.
It seems to be a bit more demanding for Black than the Slav, but I guess like anything it's a case of sticking with it and learning the lines and positions.
Incidentally, you may want to consider that ICC membership if you are interested in video instruction - I was impressed with all the Alterman QGA material, which I've watched a couple of times. There are five clips of about 25 mins each, I think, although I don't recall any coverage of 3...Nc6; he focused mainly on 3...e5 and 3...Nf6 in response to 3.e4.

gwnn wrote on 07/11/12 at 17:35:30:


I have an ICC account and have watched the full video but don't recall anything other than about 15 seconds worth of commentary mentioning h3, g4, Ne5 and maybe Qb3 as ideas White can use against this line, nothing really concrete and nothing following the book mainline really.
Not sure that there was anything there to seriously deter Black from trying the ...Bg4 line, especially as I imagine Sam Collins put a fair amount of effort into the repertoire he gives.
It's a DVD I may buy at some point, actually, so thanks for the review - have you had time to go through it in much detail yet?
I always feel more comfortable playing 3...e5 against 3e4 but 3...Nc6 is interesting, just seems a bit positionally strange to me. Does it lead to messy tactical battles the way he suggests playing it?

You may want to compare Collins' analysis to Alterman's analysis of the same variation. Alterman shows some excellent weapons for White. Does Collins mention Alterman?

I bought this DVD this week. It is interesting enough, looks like a low-maintenance repertoire that leads to solid positions (if slightly passive at times). According to Collins, he had been put off by seeing Alex Baburin suffer in the main lines over and over again, but when he saw that Avrukh couldn't find an advantage after 4 .. Bg4, he thought that it might be interesting to try this sideline. Lo and behold, the DVD.

Sam Collins often compares this repertoire to the Nimzo or Slav positions (where Black often adopts a blockading stance in the centre, usually on the light squares). The basic idea of the repertoire is that in place of (1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. e3 Bg4 5. Bxc4 e6 6. h3 Bh5 7. Nc3 Nbd7 8. O-O) 8 .. Bd6 which leads to some annoying endgames, we play 8 .. Bb4 and Black should be OK, despite White usually winning the bishop pair. There are plenty of videos on this line. I haven't watched them all but they appear to all end in what he calls approximately equal positions. There is no pretense that black can play for a win in all of them (there are perpetuals in more than one line), but often the positions are quite unbalanced, in particular black has a queenside pawn majority and possibly a more straightforward plan.

So, says Collins, if 4 .. Bg4 with 8 .. Bb4 works, what else do you need to have a repertoire? You need 3 e3 e5 to avoid the main lines and something against the other lines. He chooses 3 e4 Nc6 and 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 a6 (although offering 4 .. Bf5 as an interesting low-theory line) and 4 Qa4+ c6, transposing to the Slav with Qb3/Qc2.

In the 3 e4 Nc6 line, he shows the interesting newish move (apparently first played in 2011) 1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. e4 Nc6 4. Nf3 Bg4 5. d5 Ne5 6. Bf4 Ng6 7. Be3 Nf6 8. Nc3 e5 9. Bxc4 Nh4 but I don't really understand it. We played 6 .. Ng6 because taking on f3 would hand white a nice pawn chain f3-e4-d5, but now we're happy to spend two more moves to give him just that? Can anyone help me with this? The main game is Airapetian v Ionov, Olginka RUS 2011.