WSS wrote on 12/30/12 at 15:12:28:

I am quite confident that 4.e3 O-O 5.Nge2 is totally equal, at least after 5...d5 6.a3 Bd6, probably also after 6...Be7, but I'm not completely sure, simply because I stopped looking at it after I found more than one way to equalise in the 6...Bd6 line (using Sokolov's Nimzo book)

WSS wrote on 12/29/12 at 01:24:50:

I think Schandorff too optimistic about White's chances after 4.e3 O-O 5.Nge2.
As for 1...g6 Schandorff's recommendations (1.d4 g6 2.c4 f5 3.h4 and 2...d6 3.e4) look attractive to me. His treatment of 1.d4 e6 2.c4 f5 is under par though. It took me less than five minutes to take the angle out of his 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 Bb4 5.Qb3.

Smyslov_Fan wrote on 12/29/12 at 04:57:57:


Thanks SF.  Interesting question... I don't believe there are any transpositional issues there.  The difference between Watson and Schandorff in the QGD is that Watson prefers a more classical Nf3 deployment while Schandorff advocates the Nge2, f3 and eventual e3-e4 plan.  Against the Nimzo I would follow the Schandorff move order with Nge2 (similar to Watson) so transpositions from a Nimzo move order should be covered. 

On the whole I am following Schandorff against the primary QGD and Slav move orders other than the ...a6 Slav where I have more faith in Watson's 6.b3 than Schandorff's 5.c5 approach.

Bill

I've purchased and highly recommend both John Watson's "A Strategic Chess Opening Repertoire for White" and Lars Schandorff's series "Playing 1.d4 The Queen's Gambit and The Indian Defenses."  I find myself drawn to a hybrid combination of the two repertoires and wanted to share my choices and get your feedback and suggestions.  I love Watson's book but in some cases I wanted a bit more aggressive line such as is generally found in Schandorff.

To minimize the typing, I will use (W) for Watson and (S) for Schandorff.  I also prefer a line against the Tarrasch from Aagaard and Nitirlis (A&N) from Grandmaster Repertoire 10.

1.  Queen's Gambit Declined - (S) Modern Exchange with 9.Nge2: slightly more aggressive than the 9.Nf3 classical approach
2.  Queen's Gambit Accepted - (W) Main line with 3.Nf3
3.  Slav - (S) Main line with 6.Ne5: Watson 3.Nc3 line seems a bit in trouble
4.  Semi-Slav - (S) Aggressive 5.Bg5
5.  ...a6 Slav - (W) with 6.b3 by transposition - seems to offer more chance for an edge
6.  Tarrasch - (A&N) 6.dxc5: forces Black to defend precisely and avoids some heavy theory
7.  Kings Indian - (S) Samisch
8.  Nimzo - (W/S) 4.e3 with Nge2
9.  Grunfeld - (S) Russian System
10.  Benoni - (S) 7.Nge2: although I have to say I've gotten good results so far with Watson
11.  Benko - (W) 4.Qc2: may force a Benko player to think more (which is what they are trying to avoid  )
12.  Dutch - (W) 2.Nc3

Of course taste in playing style and opinions may vary, but I am trying to find the right mix of both author's approaches which yield the best chances.  Would appreciate your thoughts.  Thanks.

Bill