18 ( +1 | -1 ) 2.Nf3 after 1.d4I'm interested in Queens pawn systems holding back the c-pawn and instead playing 2.Nf3, is anyone a regular Queens pawn opener who can offer some advice on this?
110 ( +1 | -1 ) Some advices...I suppose that you mean not to play the thematic c4 in the opening. There are several systems: Colle, London, and Torre-Trompovsky. The Colle system is characterized by the moves e3, c3, Nf3, Nbd2, Bd3, 0-0, Re1 and then eventually e4. It is very quiet and usually lead to the equality. The London system is characterized by the devolpment of the queen's bishop in f4, outside of e3. So, after 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Bf4 Bf5 and only after e3. The main drawback is that pawn at b2 will be vulnerable to Qb6, and white has to defend it with the passive move Qc1 (or eventually Qc2 if the C pawn has moved to c3, planning e4). The Torre system. It is similar to the Trompovsky (1. d4 Nf6 2. Bg5), but in this case black's queen's pawn is in d5 and white's king's knight is in Nf3. Don't know too much of this line, but I think that 3. ... Ne4 is a good reply, better than in the Trompovsky, since pawn at d5 already controls e4. After 4. Bf4 c5 5. e3 Qb6, imho black is just a bit better. The position of white is more restricted than in the queen's gambit, and this can make the things more difficult in trying to obtain the victory. But these quiet system are not to be underrate, if black doesn't play in precise way, white's slow attack strategy can be winning.
51 ( +1 | -1 ) Zukertort variationIs another one. 1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 e6 3. e3 Nf6 4. Bd3 c5 5. b3!? Not very popular lately, but quite sound. Most Opening references claim that after: 5. Nc6 Bb2 6. Bd6 Nbd2 7. 0-0 0-0 8. Qc7 a3 (necessary to prevent Nb4 and the exchange of the strong bishop on d3) -- black equalises. Thought it is not clear to me (and luckily I recently found that it wasn't clear to Em. Lasker either), why white should play 7. 0-0 so early? instead 7. a3 0-0 8. Ne5 Qc7 f4 can be played and white is succesfull in planting his blockading knight on e5, thus gaining a slight advantage (at least in my opinion). Thought all of this needs to be researched.
Is pretty good...usually it leads to a Colle-style pawn triangle (c3-d4-e3), Nbd2, Bd3 etc. Black has to be careful, for example castling too early can be dangerous. There are several plans like playing "Colle-style" w/e4, transposing to a superior version of Stonewall attack w/(Ne5-)f4 (because Bg5 is active) or even playing on queenside w/b4. When I played Torre I often got good positions against systems where Black played d5 (even when Black plays carefully there MIGHT be a chance for microscophic advantage) but more flexible setups w/d6 were hard to crack.
1.d4 2.Nf3 3.Bg5 can be played against other setups as well, for example 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 b6 3.Bg5 is ok and offers decent practical chances while 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.Bg5 is safe but not too promising. I do not like 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bg5?! because as pointed out by Sodiumattack after 3...Ne4! it is White who is struggling to equalize.
IMHO, after 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 (and perhaps after 2...b6) it is pretty good alternative to main lines w/c4, after 2...g6 it is decent "just play chess" system for those who want to skip theoretical lines of KID and Grunfeld, after 1...d5 it is propably better to play something else.
Of course, one can always use 1.d4 2.Nf3 move-order and make a choice between 3.Bg5 /or 3.Bf4, 3.e3 etc) and 3.c4 based on what Black plays in move 2.
23 ( +1 | -1 ) ot KIDTake in consideration that the Saemisch is my favourite reply against the KID, but there are a lot of other good replies with the knight at f3 and the pawn at f2, such as the Petrosjan and the Averbach. The Seamisch was feared a lot in the beginning of the 30s, but now every KID player can face it.
25 ( +1 | -1 ) WellAlthough the Saemisch was at one point considered the strongest continuation against the Kings Indian, today the Bayonet has endured success and is considered very strong. The Petrosian and Averbach are not usually considerd to be strongest, and the Averbach does not involve the knight on f3.
30 ( +1 | -1 ) KIDWith the knight on f3 I do not intend to play the main KID continuations, ie I would hold the c-pawn form c4 and play the london system, etc. Therefore the Saemisch, Averbach, are irrelevant. Also I used to and still like to play the fianchetto variation to meet the KID. I've never studied the Saemisch and I don't think it's in my style.
9 ( +1 | -1 ) KIDI'm not entirely sure about this, but wasn't the London system originally supposed to nix the KID?