Slav Defense, Changing My Repertoire Choice Again: Thoughts or Advice?

Longer annotated pgn coming up to give some context of where I'm coming from. There are other lines I've studied as well (and also several key variations, or mainline branches, I've excluded which are necessary to know for a Slav Defense player too). However, here is a simplistic history of my Slav changes in question:

- 6...e6 mainline I used for most of my "chess career" (although experimenting with variations included and not included in this pgn as well), but I changed opening choice because I didn't like black's endgame position as much in the line I show. The ...e6 line mainly got me to 1950-ish chess.com Rapid, but I wanted to change to a sharp variation which even better fit my playstyle AND I felt I was better in evaluation. 

- 6...Nbd7 mainline I switched to fairly recently, but I seldom got this line too deeply (at least compared to the 6...e6 line) and so I'm looking for another sharp Slav option for black.

- Anti-Moscow Variation (or regular Moscow if white plays 6. Bxf6) is what I'm considering now. The hope is this sharp line has what I'm looking for in an opening to become my go-to repertoire weapon vs 1. d4 and Queen's Gambit setups. Anti-Moscow is in the pgn, but here are the first 6 moves which characterize the opening: 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 e6 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bh4 (6. Bxf6 Moscow Gambit if white chooses it) I'm debating to switching to this opening mainline for black. Thoughts or advice anyone? I'm exponentially curious to hear from any higher rated Slav Defense/Semi-Slav Defense players on their opinions.

Game changes to ragonzin variation 

I don't like this opening for myself because I don't play the Queen's Gambit Declined move orders (did experiment with Cambridge Springs out of QGD for a while though).

I am a Queen’s gambit player and have over 70% percent win rate against the Slav defense in rapid(according to my database). I also have some prep against it(side lines). So when we play the rapid game. You gotta be prepared xD

lol that is fine with me. Perhaps you should take a look at this pgn for some ideas then Besides, there are several other variations I know (not included) because we can't be just a one-trick pony. It is still a good idea to have a primary choice for a repertoire though; that is the purpose of this thread. With some luck, I'll get some good advice tailored to what I seek, I'll study the selected variation(s) deeper, practice implementing it into my repertoire (via rated chess.com games I'm sure) and maybe after all of that I can say I've made more of the transition xD

If we play in a few days from now @cellen01, then it is doubtful I'll be fully using anything new revealed by this thread but thanks for dropping by and posting a comment

My 1400 rated brain is just sitting here thinking "Huh, fascinating..."

I'm a Semi-Slav player 1930 on l*chess (I almost never play rated here) and I think you could seriously consider the Cambridge Springs, it's a very serious opening and it has been tried by many great players like Alekhine, Magnus, Kasparov and Mamedyarov from the top of my mind, if White follows the main-moves the position is probably equal (as any good opening should be) but I can assure you White almost never knows the theory because the best moves are either the controversial 7 cxd5 or the weird 7 Nd2 (I challenge an opening principles only player to find that one!) the threats of Ne4, dxc4 ecc... give Black an easier, active game if he is prepared and White has to make very difficult decisions, one bad or careless move and you can be better! What I love the most about this line is that White never gets anything resembling an Orthodox QGD and he has to think on his own by playing non-traditional Queen's Gambit moves! The Cambridge Springs is also very good because for many people is a surprise (it even stands the test of time nowadays) and It avoids all the crazy Botvinnik lines :) If you have any questions about specific lines or tabiyas feel free to ask me

My Semi-Slav study does cover almost everything there is to learn about the Anti-Moscow and completely with the Botvinnik. The only thing incomplete is the mainline 10.0-0 but it might have everything you will get to

That's okay, thanks for participating in this thread; maybe we'll get some insightful responses in this thread and we both can learn together

As for opening theory goes, this is probably slightly deeper than most near 2000-ish, but this is partly because it is one of my primary openings to my repertoire and partly due to the naturally theoretical nature of the Slav/Semi-Slav Defenses.

l*chess does seem to be inflated to chess.com ratings (I've reached 2000+ on that site probably 6 months before being able to grind my rating that high on chess.com), but nevertheless 1930 rating there is still very high and certainly 1800+ rating on chess.com (depending on how much rated you eventually play on here). Your rating is easily high enough to which I'm all ears to advice, suggestions, or thoughts; you being a Semi-Slav player even more so

If you check this thread pgn (I know there are a lot of moves and variation annotations), I mentioned the Cambridge Springs in here. Yes, it can be a good opening for a bit more control than the sharp/theoretical lines of the Botvinnik or similar, but that is what I love! I don't mind diving into dangerous Botvinnik or Moscow lines This preference means I've had some sharp games which I've won against very strong players, but also lost against much lower rated players too. With the double-edged nature of sharp chess, you either win a great game, or you go down in flames; I die hard At least all its games give for good analysis though.

Thanks for the post, but yeah I've experimented with the solid Cambridge Springs opening before, but I want something sharper like these mainlines I'm considering now

Thanks; the least I can do is give it a look

On the Slav- I'm not well-experienced with it and don't play it, but I know a bit about it. If I were you, I wouldn't completely give up on your previous lines, but instead add the Moscow or Anti-Moscow depending to your repertoire and play all of them. Get the hang of playing it first, then decide if you really want to play on exclusively if you like it. I used to play the Semi-Slav, almost always going into the Meran, and I'd suggest you try that occasionally. It probably won't suit you too well if you're looking for super-sharp lines to play, but there can be some fireworks in the center. I used to play the French alongside the Meran, which was how I managed to cope with my dysfunctional light-squared bishop. Against 1. e4 though I switched to other openings, leaving the French for occasional games. But back to 1. d4 and the Slav. For the Anti-Moscow you would only want to play it if you're very comfortable in tactical and dynamic situations. You get a pawn and flank space against the classical e4-d4 large white center, so both sides have to be extremely careful and a single mistake could ruin the game for you. White always has the option to play the Moscow, which is a little bit tamer. Overall I think you should definitely try it and see if you like it. Losing a few games with it will help you understand why you lost and what you did wrong, preparing you to play it better later one (but don't just go throwing games ).

But you know me, I'm a diehard KID fan and I'll always take up the chance to encourage someone else to play it too so there's another option that's always open. 

Thanks for the in-depth post @colorfulcake

The shorter portion which I quoted here, I especially like and yes this "single mistake could ruin the game" I'm very familiar with

That is a good idea to not ditch the other variations I know, but after some experimenting, I might be at the point where I'll try the Moscow/Anti-Moscow soon. (I've probably played all the slav and semi-slav mainlines at some point in experimenting xD)

Ive been playing english latley so idk. I need to practice the Queens Gambit more ive played it and not yet have full knowledge of it.

All right; English is a cool opening I've messed around with in off-hand games before

I think English is easy to mess up to lol

but its very good

English is very flexible opening. But I like 1. d4 better.

true