Declining the Queen's Gambit

John Cox has a new repertoire book out Declining the Queen's Gambit.  He advocates the Tartakower and Lasker Defenses.  I have the book The Queen's Gambit & Catalan for Black by Lasha Janigava.  The Janjgava book has served me well but was printed in 2000.  Has that much gone on in the Tartakower in the past 10 years?  It bothers me that Cox doesn't show the Janjgava book in his bibliography.  One thing,  the Cox book has much bigger print which with my declining eyesight is a plus.  I would welcome opinions on whether I should purchase the Cox book.

I don't think the tartakower changes much at all, I haven't heard much about it, and I do play it myself.  The Lasker might be used a little more recently.  There is an excellent on-line summary of the Lasker on the website of the Kenilworth, New Jersey chess club "The Kenelworthian" with playable annotated games by a master rank player.  It might be worth getting a new book written by a native English speaking author, in my opinion.

No, there hasn't been many changes in the Tartakower in the past 10 years. However, I do not reccommend playing that opening. I played it for several years, and I see that it has a tendency to be somewhat drawish. It doesn't put a lot of pressure on black in the get-go. The Lasker Defense has been known to be quite drawish as well and out of fashion until recently. Now, there are some good ideas for both white and black. I would reccommend that you learn it and test it out, to see how you like it.

Thanks for the responses.  I went and ordered the Cox book today.  If I learn one new thing from it, then I will be satisfied.

If you play the QGD, it doesn't hurt to also pick up Sadler's Queen's Gambit Declined if you can find it used. It's not that new either (2000), but the explanations are just superb: it won the BCF's book of the year award, and that rarely happens with opening books. You also don't get that many opening books written by 2600+ players.

 If it's structured anything like his Berlin Wall opening book, then it must be good.

I now have Cox's book.  It is not structured anything like the Berlin Wall.  The book is almost all theory and very little on strategical explanations.  There seems to be very little change in the Tartakower proper.   The main difference from the Janjgava book is that Janjgava gives you more choices.  Cox gives you a very narrow repertoire but gives whole games.  It is very different from the Janjgava book when White avoids the Tartakower with the exchange variation, 5.Bf5, or the  the Catalan.  Cox goes more for sidelines when White avoids the Tartakower, while Janjgava goes more with mainlines (Janjgava assumes you know how to play the middle-games.).  I don't have an opinion on Cox's sidelines but I will not be throwing my copy of Janjgava's book away.  I would say Cox's book would be good if you want to try for a win with Black, while Janjgava will always get you to a very solid middle game.