kylemeister - Thanks for sharing that bit of information. I've seen the term "post-up" used in a basketball context, but not in chess. A quick look of the section on the Exchange QGD  in my copy of Road to Chess Improvement didn't find any explanation by Yermolinsky for why he used it, although he did point out that Pillsbury was the first to come up with the plan of Nf3-e5 and f2-f4 followed by a rook lift to f3 and then h3. Perhaps "post-up" has something to do with the knight occuplying a forward outpost?

Nernstian59 wrote on 03/15/26 at 03:05:10:

Sometimes I think authors reach a tabiya position where either side has chances. By way of illustration, let's say that white has an isolated queen pawn with freer play. That position could be advocated for white by one author, and for black by another author. They are both right!

kylemeister wrote on 03/14/26 at 13:45:38:

kylemeister - That new product caught my eye as well. Perhaps Dirk's jest about "championing this stuff from the white side once again" is indeed taking place! 

I compared the sample from Chapter 5 of GMs Moroni and Basso's new database with the relevant section of Semkov's Squeezing the QGD and found the analyses to be quite similar. Instead of going for the common QGD Exchange Variation plans of the minority attack or the central advance with f3 + e4, the recommendations for both are Nf3-e5 + f2-f4, which seems a bit reminiscent of the Pillsbury Attack. The Moroni/Basso product does seem rather more detailed based on my cursory look.

One other thing that I noticed: Moroni authored a Modern Chess database covering the QGD Exchange Variation for Black, which came out back in October. It recommended 5...Be6, so I'm wondering how he's going to handle his own Black repertoire in his newly released product. I seem to recall other authors have used the approach of taking what an engine evaluates as an equal position from the Black repertoire and saying that White has easier play or better practical chances in that position.

Dink Heckler wrote on 02/07/26 at 10:22:02:

I notice that there is now a product for White at Modern Chess. I recall co-author Luca Moroni as being on the white side against Sabino Brunello a decade ago, a game which appeared in Chess Publishing as showing good play by Black.

FreeRepublic - Thanks for pointing out the availability of Squeezing the QGD on ForwardChess. I'll definitely keep that in mind, though I'm sufficiently antiquated to prefer the printed version, at least for the moment. 

I like your Catalan example. You're correct - there were numerous White repertoires promising that real plus. Avurkh's 1.d4 Grandmaster Repertoire books for Quality Chess stand out in my memory in this respect. In more recent years, engine-assisted Black repertoires have neutralized the Catalan and pretty much all other White repertoires to the point where a claim of an objective edge isn't viewed as very creditable. Instead, the authors of the White repertoires have shifted to achieving more nebulous advantages such as providing White with greater familiarity with the resulting positions, posing practical difficulties than Black, or simply getting positions that are "easier" to play.

kylemeister - Thanks for pointing out Davies' book! It's been languishing in my "To Be Read Someday" pile, so I was unaware it had the Timman-Yusupov game. I went through Davies' comments, and they're definitely are on point.

kylemeister wrote on 02/09/26 at 03:00:44:

It's a bit of overkill to check Timman's brief, 1995-vintage note with modern engines, but I see that his evaluation is rather modest. Stockfish considers White to be clearly winning after 23.d6. The passed d-pawn is a monster. Also, the engine prefers to play d5-d6 first and then b2-b3 since 22.b3 could be answered with 22...g5, which cuts down White's advantage a bit.

cathexis - I had a recent experience with AI that you might find amusing. It's OT relative to the QGD, so I'll create a separate thread.

Dink - Thanks for your observation. It explains why I'm experiencing a bit of cognitive whiplash from all of those courses presenting a variety of equalizing lines for Black. I must have retained a lingering impression from those 80s/90s repertoire books that recommended the Exchange Variation for White. Perhaps they emphasized Kasparov's success with the line (and possibly Botvinnik's earlier employment) to create the perception that it provided a sure edge for White. And you're right - I'm eagerly awaiting the White reaction to that plethora of repertoire courses for Black. Squeezing the QGD by Semkov might be the start, though I'm having difficulties finding that book here in the US. One book seller has informed me that he's still waiting for the distributor to deliver it.

kylemeister - I looked at Sjugirov-Yusupov, Qatar Masters 2014, and I agree it's possible that Sjugirov had something prepared for the game, which followed Timman-Yusupov through move 20. Sjugirov's 21.d5 is a pawn sac that's the one chance for advantage, so it could possibly be prep. However, only two moves later, his 23.d6 (instead of 23.h3) is tempting but an inaccuracy. Did his prep only go a move or two beyond the initial idea?

The diagrams in Reply #3 show the critical position after 23.d6. (I'm not sure of the poster's intent for the identical diagrams. Perhaps he wanted to also show the Sirota-Sander correspondence game, which arrived at the same position). At any rate, 23...Qh4 equalizes, but Yusupov's 23...Qg5 is met by 24.Ne4, gaining a vital tempo to bring the knight into the attack and obtaining a winning position. 

In going through the game with Stockfish, I got the impression that Yusupov was close to equal after a dozen moves, but wound up a bit worse due to reasonable-looking but sub-optimal moves such as 15...Ng6, 16...Bg5, and 19...Bc4, even before his error with 23...Qg5. If a player with Yusupov's skill and experience can slip into difficulties where a single false step can end in disaster, the "equal" position may present some practical difficulties for Black.