BobbyDigital80 wrote on 04/30/15 at 03:30:01:


No.

Another valid move order is:
1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 Bb4 5. e3. This is a Ragozin to Nimzo-Indian transposition. It may not happen often, but there is nothing wrong with it and Black should be prepared.

Black has many reasonable Rubenstein Nimzo variations from which to choose. I'm considering:

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 Bb4 5. e3 O-O 6. Bd3 b6 7. O-O Bb7. This was dubbed the Tal variation by Gligoric. It is recommended in Edward Dearing's Play the Nimzo-Indian book. 7...Ba6 is recommended by GM Kuljasevic as one of his three Rubenstein Nimzo repertoires. It's always good to have options.

In the Ragozin, after
1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 Bb4 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bf6 Qf6 7. e3 O-O 8. Rc1
The main move is 8...dxc4. GM Kulasevic covers that as his second option in his Ragozin repertoire. His preference though is for 8...Nc6. In my opinion, 8...Nc6 is the more ambitious move. A knight on c6 is necessary in the following Ragozin/Vienna line which is currently popular:

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 Bb4 5. Qa4 Nc6 6. e3 O-O 7. Qc2!?. Perhaps the two main responses are 7...Re8 and 7...b6. I'm leaning towards the latter. For example,
7...b6!? 8.Bd2 Bb7 9. cd5 ed5 10. a3 Bd6 11. Bd3 a6 12. O-O Re8 and we get a position that resembles the Tal variation mentioned above.

1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Be7 5. e3 O-O 6. Nf3 h6 7. Bh4 b6 8. Be2 Bb7 is the Tartakover variation of the Queen's Gambit Declined. Edward Dearing in his book, Play the Nimzo-Indian, pointed out the similarity between the Tal variaton and the Tartakover.

These lines have good reputations, receive favorable comments at ChessPublishing, score well in games and evaluate well with computers. They are at least semi-coherent. Black has a good grip on the center and White is restricted in his ambitions. Black is flexible about the development of his bishops.

The exchange variation and Catalan are two separate topics. There is a Nimzo/Ragozin/Catalan hybrid, but only if White makes particular choices.

From the couple games ive played the Ragozin in ive noticed that some serious mastery of the principles in QGD Orthodox, Lasker and Tartakover lines is needed to play this effectively.

as a high 1800s, the ragozin is too hard for me.

I play the bogo as a companion to the NID (even if I like the Ragozin a lot also, I have played it only in online blitz games). I would stick in the NID territory if you have a good line against 4.Nf3. Usually, that line is not so threatening to Black in the NID, White only wants an interesting game of chess but with no theoretical advantages.

My experience says that 4...c5 in the NID is easy to play than the Ragozin, where are lines with some difficulties to solve (as in the exchange var + Bg5, or Bg5 without exchange).

Any reason to change from Ragozin to NID? Specific opponent that has a huge score with the 4.Nf3 var (strange), you like more the former (Ragozin) and prefer to play this, an opponent that plays poorly the Ragozin...

Seeing in a database, in that position 4...c5 is played almost 10 times more than 4...d5. I would remain in NID waters, but this is only a personal preference.

Salut,