Cambridge Springs Transpositions...

There was an earlier thread about the Cambridge Springs but I'd like to ask a little different question.

Is the Slav or Semi-Slav a fairly reliable way to transpose into a Cambridge Springs.  I don't want to try to enter it via the QGD lines as the Exchange variation can come in way before getting to the Cambridge Springs. Not that I think the Cambridge Springs is more terrifying than the Exchange variation but that the Exchange is popular and it isn't a line I want to enter from the Black side.

If one entered via ..c6,..d5,..e6 is it more likely that one will get to it?  Are there any juicy side lines that White would be likely to enter? 

While the Exchange variation of the GQD is asymmetrical and rich the same can't be said of an early exchange from the Slav.

Thanks.  Never having studied the Slav/Semi-Slav in any detail I really don't know the lines.  While I like the Cambridge Springs I don't really want to jump through hoops to get to it.

My preference right now is a Nimzo or Ragozin QGD.

Kasparov used the Cambridge Springs to replace having to play Botvinnik or Moscow varations. In otherwords as playing against Bg5 in semi-slav.

Any Nimzo plus something combination, plus knowing something against lines without c4 is a lot of work.

I think you have to play some kind of exchange because White can capture on d5 at almost any time.

Sure.  But playing the Exchange Slav and the Exchange QGD are two very different propositions.  The Exchange QGD is an asymmetrical nicety for White who gets two center pawns, easy development of his dark squared bishop, and a semi-open c-file with prospects of minority attack, attack in the center with the Modern Exchange or sometimes attack on the kingside. 

The Exchange Slav is a lot less desirable from the White perspective. If I were playing Black I wouldn't mind an Exchange Slav.

Think overstate white's chances in exchange QGD. Theoretically against early 3Nf3 lines, the exchange variation is nothing for white, because black can easily develop Bc8.

Even when white plays the exchange in the theoretically most challenging circumstances, white is working with minimal edges. For example if acheives in carrying out  minority attack, over the years there are lots of methods for black for fighting against this, and exchanging lots of peices, white reaches an endgame with single advantage of playing against backward c-pawn. This is likely not winnable, without a blunder from black.

After 1d4 d5 2c4 c6 3nc3 e6 first of all a lot of players would describe 4pxp has lame because 4...e6xd5 gives white nothing, whilst after 4...c6xd5 at least Bc8 is something of a problem peice.

For a black player not to like the Carlsbad pawn structure he is ruling out a lot of defences to 1.d4 not just queens gambit declined.

Indeed. Knowing how to defend against the QGD: Exchange Variation should be a part of any chessplayer's repertoire. There's no avoiding it.

While I agree that the Exchange can and might be an important idea to understand I don't think it needs to be in one's repertoire anymore than the Sicilian or King's Indian Defense or English opening. They are just choices.

I'm currently playing the Nimzo and Ragozin after 3.Nf3 and they both avoid the Exchange.

This may be of interest, the Cambridge Springs move order is used against White's Bf4, which gets a bit too sharp and annoying for me when I'm black. Seems to me Be7 isn't that convienient against Bf4.

http://en.chessbase.com/post/andrew-martin-the-queen-s-gambit-declined

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krmoM2mzZ5g

I feel I have an easier time against the QGD Exchange variation with white playing Nge2 rather than the QGD 5. Bf4 variation where black has committed his bishop to e7, especially in blitz.

I agree that the Exchange isn't to be feared by Black. I'm not sure that 4. e6xd5 leaves White nothing. He has two center pawns to Black's one, the semi-open c file, a minority attack if he pursues it, and Black's light square bishop doesn't have anywhere to go after White plays Qc2 with the possibility of Bd3 later.

Karpov and Aronian (I believe) have also use the move h3 to further deprive Black's light squared bishop of any deployment.

The modern exchange with Ne2, f3 and e4 lets White expand in the center while the classical minority attack is available on the queen side.

I also think it is much easier to play from the White side than from the Black.

Thanks.  I'll definitely give this a watch.

In the following link can find games by Kasparov and Petrosian against for want of a name lame early Nf3 versions of QGD exchange.

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1106817

Black will face this pawn structure in Ragozin games. It's a feature of d-pawn games, that different openings can have similar pawn structure. Whilst e-pawn games difffernt defences have quite distinct pawn structures.

I don't think it's anywhere near as simple as people make it out to be. At Tata Steel it was described as the opening the older guys use to test the younger ones and here it worked out:

Sure.  It isn't the pawn structure that I'm terribly concerned about from the Black side. You have to ask yourself though what is that White had to give up to play that Anti-Indian? Black's light squared bishop has easy development now. I'll play that from the Black side in a heart beat.

In an early Nc3 variation by White with the Exchange variation he has the ability to confound Black's development of the light squared bishop.  In a way White gets his cake and eats it too. 

And you can see why after 6. Qc2 Black's light squared bishop doesn't have any where to go even thought he position has opened. Bd7 and Be6 are dreary.

And for me the White side just feels a lot easier to play than the Black side.

Even in the Gelfand game, which is more critical version of Carlsbad structure, the decisive mistake was made move 30 or later. So not sure can blame opening for lost, when black's position looked pretty solid coming out of opening on move 20 or so.

I like this thread a lot; the Queen's Gambit Declined is excellent defense, especially below master level. I have fewer loses and win more with black, because white doesn't understand what to do. Learn to handle the Exchange, it is alot easier than the double-edge defenses like King's Indian, Grunfeld and Dutch.

I agree that I wouldn't want to play the King's Indain, Grunfeld or Dutch.  The Gruenfeld manly because it switches from light squre to dark square strategy and that takes a bit more vigilance I think.

The Nimzo-Indian on the other hand is a defense I find fairly intuitive and a lot of White players avoid it by playing Nf3 after which ...d5 avoids the Exchange variation.  Just cxd at that point isn't the same as an early cxd as White can't keep the Black bishop out of the game.

I think you'll find the QG is quite good for above master level as well and it is probably the most common opening in world championship history.  I'm thinking of the Capablanca/Lasker/Alkehine and Karpov/Kasparov just off the top of my head.

After 1.d4 d5 c4 e6 3Nc3 c6 4pxp e6xd5 there are ways black can equalise easily compared to the ideal for white carlsbad structure too. 

The line in Gelfand game is one recomended in Cox's book on Queens Gambt. Black didn't play particularly accurately with 8...h6, with 8...Nh5 immediately after 9BxB QxB 100.0.0 black can play 10...g6 when white has to react with h3, and g4, or ne2-g3, or the typical ng7 followed by bf5 will equalise immediately.

OK.  You essentially went in via a Semi-Slav.  At that point I thnink the exchange of pawns doesn't buy White a thing.  Different from the GQD Exchange though of 1.d4 d5, 2.c4.e6, 3.Nc3 Nf6, 4. cxd.  Whether it is good, bad or indifferent the pawn structure is asymmetrical, White's queen's bishop is going to develop outside the pawn chain, and the play is fairly straightforward from White's side.  Develop, castle, get the rooks connected and then push on the queen's side or in the center or both...

That's why I'd looked at the triangle as a possible way to get to the Cambridge Springs Defense but that seems like a lot of work to get to a defense that is OK but not spectacular.