Answers.Body: <p>The thing is, that declining the gambit indeed leads to closed, more positional positions. I would recommend accepting the gambit and then playing e5 after e3 or e4. This is risky, but it does lead to more open and attacking positions.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-12-30T09:41:20.007Z
Answers.Text: Also if you accept the gambit, leave the pawn on c4, it will always be gone
Answers.UserDisplayName: Irsu85
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-12-30T09:30:24.720Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-12-30T09:30:24.720Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Jisu101
Answers.Body: <p>There is a new course on the QGD, on chessable by IM Krishnater, it revolves around playing ragozin style positions uber dynamically, you might wanna check that out for an extremely dynamic approach. Otherwise, the modern QGD as has been used by kramnik, with Nbd7, h6 and c5, often accepting an IQP, is also viable and is seen in GM colovic's QGD LTR</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2024-02-28T01:28:28.703Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2024-02-28T01:28:28.703Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: anti - Marshall
Body: <p>As a 1.e4 player who deeply enjoys sharp lines and studying/memorizing openings, I have always struggled with responding to 1.d4 since it leads to slow positional lines which usually have multiple correct answers/continuations. Over the years I have built up my repertoire and against the QG I usually play traditional main lines or Ragozin when permitted.</p>
  <p>I want to change that. <strong>What are some sharp variations in the QGD for black?</strong> I am looking for the type of openings in which there exist multiple lines that involve many bad moves and few good moves.</p>
  <p>I went over Lichess' opening explorer as I usually do and looked at the Baltic Defense (which I think seems to lead to boring drawn positions), Chigorin Defense (which seems to be equally unsharp as the main line), Austrian Defense (white has 5 playable choices by move 3 ... totally not sharp), etc. It seems that any reply to 1.d4 ... 2.c4... just leads to unsharp positions.</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-12-30T12:02:33.647Z
Comments.Text: If you want sharp lines why are you choosing queen's gambit?  Are you open to other setups against d4?  There are sharp and unbalanced options, KID, Grünfeld, etc.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Michael West
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-12-30T13:12:11.267Z
Comments.Text: Do you count 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c5 4.cxd5 cxd4 as a QGD, or as the Von Hennig-Schara gambt in the Tarrasch? The QGD proper isn't sharp, because solidity is more or less its whole goal.
Comments.UserDisplayName: RemcoGerlich
Tags: <opening><theory><queens-gambit-declined>
Title: Sharp lines in the QGD, for black?
ThreadText: # Sharp lines in the QGD, for black?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2021-12-29)
  
  As a 1.e4 player who deeply enjoys sharp lines and studying/memorizing openings, I have always struggled with responding to 1.d4 since it leads to slow positional lines which usually have multiple correct answers/continuations. Over the years I have built up my repertoire and against the QG I usually play traditional main lines or Ragozin when permitted.
  
  I want to change that. **What are some sharp variations in the QGD for black?** I am looking for the type of openings in which there exist multiple lines that involve many bad moves and few good moves.
  
  I went over Lichess' opening explorer as I usually do and looked at the Baltic Defense (which I think seems to lead to boring drawn positions), Chigorin Defense (which seems to be equally unsharp as the main line), Austrian Defense (white has 5 playable choices by move 3 ... totally not sharp), etc. It seems that any reply to 1.d4 ... 2.c4... just leads to unsharp positions.
  
  **Tags:** opening, theory, queens-gambit-declined
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: If you want sharp lines why are you choosing queen's gambit?  Are you open to other setups against d4?  There are sharp and unbalanced options, KID, Grünfeld, etc.  
  > **username_2**: Do you count 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c5 4.cxd5 cxd4 as a QGD, or as the Von Hennig-Schara gambt in the Tarrasch? The QGD proper isn't sharp, because solidity is more or less its whole goal.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 2 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2021-12-30. Score: 3 | Accepted answer
  
  The thing is, that declining the gambit indeed leads to closed, more positional positions. I would recommend accepting the gambit and then playing e5 after e3 or e4. This is risky, but it does lead to more open and attacking positions.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_4**: Also if you accept the gambit, leave the pawn on c4, it will always be gone  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_5 on 2024-02-28. Score: 0
  
  There is a new course on the QGD, on chessable by IM Krishnater, it revolves around playing ragozin style positions uber dynamically, you might wanna check that out for an extremely dynamic approach. Otherwise, the modern QGD as has been used by kramnik, with Nbd7, h6 and c5, often accepting an IQP, is also viable and is seen in GM colovic's QGD LTR
  
  
  ---
  
  