Playing 1.d4 D5 A Classical Repertoire

[Yahaira Petrov]

Inaddition to the classical QGD, Ntirlis offers a complete repertoire against the Catalan, London System, Torre and all other significant alternatives from move 2 onwards. Every chapter begins with a discussion of typical plans, pawn structures and other relevant themes. This book also includes two bonus chapters covering 1.c4 and 1.Nf3, providing a starter repertoire for QGD players against both moves.

I'm making my way through John Emms' Discovering Chess Openings, and I'm really enjoying it. The way the topics are laid out makes sense to me and almost all of my "but what about...?" questions in each section get answered by the end of the chapter. It is, however, pretty heavily a 1. e4 e5 book. Emms even says in his preface, "Perhaps I've indulged a little more in 1 e4 e5 openings, and if so I make no excuses for this." But no worries, I'm digging it.

Some of the coaches whose videos I watch, including GothamChess, say that folks at my level should be looking a bit more at 1. d4 d5 instead. I'd love any suggestions for a book along those lines for when I finish Emms. I've seen mixed reviews of Ntirlis' Playing 1.d4 d5 so if anyone here has read it, I'd love your feedback. Oh, and I should note, I'm a strong beginner, not even close to what you'd call a "club player" yet. Thanks.

If you are interested in the queen's gambit, Matthew Sadler's "Queen's Gambit Declined" is a great book. It doesn't overwhelm you with variations. Instead, it provides the thinking and planning behind the moves.

Matthew Sadler's "Queen's Gambit Declined", recommended above by @OldPatzerMike, is certainly a very instructive book. I too recommend it highly. I also like Neil McDonald's "Starting Out Queen's Gambit Declined". If you want to learn the QGD, you can't go wrong with either book. In fact, for anyone seriously interested in playing the QGD, I would recommend getting both books. Note that because it is Black who declines the (Queen's) Gambit, studying the QGD is inherently a study of Blacks plans and strategies. Of course, an implicit part of this study must include White's best attempts to win. These books do a good job of dealing with both perspectives. The Queen's Gambit is a great opening, and the QGD is a great response to it (I prefer the Tartakower Variation/Defense).

Matthew Sadler's "Queen's Gambit Declined", recommended above by @OldPatzerMike, is certainly a very instructive book. I recommend it highly. I also like Neil McDonald's "Starting Out Queen's Gambit Declined". If you want to learn the QGD, you can't go wrong with either book. In fact, for anyone seriously interested in playing the QGD, I would recommend getting both books. Note that because it is Black who declines the (Queen's) Gambit. studying the QGD is inherently a study of Blacks plans and strategies. Of course, an implicit part of this study must be White's best attempts to win. These books do a good job of dealing with both perspectives. The Queen's Gambit is a great opening, and the QGD is a great response to it (I prefer the Tartakower Variation/Defense).

Hi Russ. Thanks for the vote of confidence on Sadler's book. I'm not familiar with the McDonald book, but everything I've seen from him has been excellent. If I ever start playing chess again, I'll be sure to get his "Starting Out" book on the QGD. I see that McDonald covers the Cambridge Springs variation, which I like. Sadler doesn't, though he is great on the Exchange and Lasker variations, as well as the Tartakower (which you like and I don't).

Yes, I consider GM McDonald to be one of the better chess book authors. He generally does a better than average job of explaining things - moves, plans and strategies, etc. - in a way that is digestible for the improving amateur player (e.g., me). The same goes for Sadler's QGD book.

As far as the QGD Tartakower Defense (TD) vs Cambridge Springs Defense (CSD), I had not checked out the CSD, instead focusing on the TD because it features an early fianchetto (i.e., development!) of the Queen's Bishop (QB), whereas it appears in the CSD that the QB spends much of its time entombed in its crypt on c8 due to a Black pawn camped out on e6.

On the other hand, upon casually perusing the CSD chapter in McDonald's QGD book just now, it seems that there are several interesting traps that Black can spring (pun intended) on the unwary opponent, which should make it an interesting variation to play, especially against those who are not familiar with it. On that score, it might prove worthwhile to learn to play the CSD first, then perhaps later the TD, if/when one decides that early development of the QB is preferred/desirable. In fact I would think that learning both variations would serve the serious QGD player very well.

@RussBell -- Thanks for those observations. Based on what you've said, I checked out Sadler's coverage of the Tartakower. I've always felt uncomfortable about the c6 square after the b pawn gives up control of it, but it looks like I was making too much of it. The square certainly is weakened, but if Black plays accurately it's difficult for White to take advantage of it. And getting the LSB on a good diagonal in a QGD has a great deal of appeal. I might well add the Tartakower to the Lasker and the Cambridge Springs in my QGD repertoire.

Regarding "Playing 1.d4 d5 - A Classical Repertoire" by Nikolaos Ntirlis. It is a complete repertoire for Black for games beginning 1.d4 d5, primarily the Queen's Gambit Declined (QGD), including White's Bf4 variations, and the Catalan Opening. Also treated (to a lesser extent) are the Pseudo Trompowsky, Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, Veresov Opening, Jobava System, (King's) Fianchetto System, Colle System, Torre System, London System, Stonewall System, English Opening, and King's Indian Attack.

In other words, although serious intermediate-level club players may find the book digestible, the book is written at an advanced level, being targeted primarily to titled players, when the beginner-novice would typically find it to be very challenging to absorb. In any event, I believe it would serve as a useful reference for Black against 1.d4. One can judge for themselves how appropriate it would be in terms of difficulty from the following pdf book excerpt...

Major disappointment is that it's a repertoire for Black. A lowly amateur like myself needs to understand an opening from both sides. At clubs & tournaments I'm not always given Black. Generally Ntirlis assumes White will make one of his few best moves and only gives those lines. Again & again I was wondering what would I respond if a different move was made.

Sadler's book is a classic. I've spent the most time with Samarian's older book on the QGD. It's likely you can get a second hand one cheap. I think Samarian was one of the early writers to reference postal chess games.

Beginning players should either start with 1.e4 or 1.d4, as both of these moves stand on the firm ground of classical chess lore. They are more straight-forward and easier to play than modern approaches, such as 1.c4 (English Opening) or 1.Nf3 (Reti-Opening). Classical chess strategy is the basis of modern chess strategy. It goes without saying, that laying a solid foundation is the first step when beginning a chess career.

My main reason for advocating 1.d4 is an economical one. There simply is much less to learn. As the arising positions are less concrete or tactical in nature, there is less opening theory to digest and also the consequences of having gaps in the opening repertoire are less severe.

The time you gain by adopting this more robust, less high maintenance approach can be invested in other areas of chess, where it is desperately needed. Take into account, that the black side of the repertoire also has to be developed, which not only includes lines against 1.e4 and 1.d4, but also weapons against 1.c4 and 1.Nf3. Then, there are the chess endings and the vast area of middlegame strategy, including pawn structures, positional principles and tactical motives.

Left-handed boxers have an advantage, as most of their opponents are used to fight right-handed adversaries. The same principle can be applied to chess. Most beginning players start with 1.e4 and are also confronted by more 1.e4-players than 1.d4 players, as you normally move within your peer group. Due to this general lack of experience with 1.d4-positions on that playing level, my students will be much more knowledgeable than their opponents, once 1.d4 is on the board. They will definitively have a competitive advantage.

Many 1.e4-players change to other first moves later in their career, when they feel that the arising position are to wild or tactical for their diminishing calculation skills. Another motivation would be the decreasing power of their memory. All these concrete lines in the 1.e4-universe can become a problem with age. Now, becoming old might be an abstract notion for a kid, but it will inevitably happen. The thing is, that changing the repertoire from one major first move to the other is quite a big deal. It is so big, that many players are stuck at the one move they learned as beginners, even though it might cause them problems. It is a big amount of work that many are shying away from. There are several conclusions we can draw from that:

"I find this book to be amazing. The repertoire is ambitious, and, yes, there is plenty to remember and you will have to work hard to get through this volume. However, Schandorff has done most of the work for you by selecting the lines, handing you the key alternatives, analyzing everything, and providing you with countless new ideas in every single variation. Nothing worthwhile ever comes easy, and working your way through this book will be worthwhile! The result of your efforts will be to have an armory of weapons in all the lines of the Queen's Gambit, and you will become a stronger chess player. It may even hand you some easy wins along the way."

"I liked very much Schandorff's twin works, as they offer a pragmatic repertoire for a wide range of strengths. If you are tempted by 1.d4, but are lacking in ideas, then with this pair of books '...you just might find, you get what you need'."

3a8082e126