What are black's possible plans in the exchange variation of the Queen's Gambit? I've reached this position, or something similar, a zillion times as both black and white (main line exchange queen's gambit):

[fen ""]

1.d4 e6 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 exd5 5.Bg5 c6 6.e3 Be7 7.Bd3 O-O 8.Nf3 Nbd7 9. O-O


As white, I typically employ the plans: (a) a minority attack with the a- and b-pawns, (b) put the bishop behind the queen on the b1-h7 diagonal and create weaknesses in black's kingside [more effective if black has played h6], or (c) aim the push the e4-pawn.

As black, I feel planless.  Hence...

Question: What are black's possible plans in the exchange variation of the Queen's Gambit?

The things that spring to mind are the ...c5 push (leading to a black IQP game), or ...b6 followed by ...Bb7 and ...c5 (although it always seems difficult to locate the queen after these moves).
Question: What are black's possible plans in the exchange variation of
  the Queen's Gambit?


I think the positions could be classified into two main types depending upon where White develops the g1 knight - f3 or e2.

A) Black's ideas when White develops Knight on f3

1) Knight mavouvere - d7-f8-e6-g7 followed by Bf5!

A very interesting idea was introduced in the game Reshevsky vs Stahlberg, 1937. Instead of "automatically" castling, Black first mavouvers the knight to e6, thereby saving a tempo and prepares to play g6 followed by Ng7 and Bf5! In his DVD on the Queens Gambit, Garry Kasparov considers this to be Black's main idea of solving the problem of the bishop on c8 and also exchanging White's strong bishop on d3. 

  [Event "Knight manouvere d7-f8-e6-g7 followed by Bf5!"]
  [Date "1937"]
  [White "Reshevsky"]
  [Black "Stahlberg"]
  [Result "1/2-1/2"]
  [FEN ""]

    1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 Nbd7 6. cxd5 exd5 7. e3 c6 8.
    Qc2 Nf8 9. Bd3 Ne6 10. Bh4 g6 11. O-O-O O-O 12. Kb1 Ng7 13. h3 Bf5 14. Bxf6
    Bxf6 15. g4 Bxd3 16. Qxd3 Ne6 17. h4 c5 18. dxc5 Bxc3 19. Qxc3 Rc8 20. e4 Rxc5
    21. Qa3 Qd6 22. exd5 Rd8 23. Qxa7 Rxd5 24. Rxd5 Qxd5 25. Qe3 h5 26. Re1 hxg4
    27. Ne5 Ng7 28. Qe4 Qxe4+ 29. Rxe4 f5 30. Rc4 Kh7 31. Kc2 Re8 32. Nd3 Ne6 33.
    a4 Kh6 34. Rb4 Re7 35. Rb6 f4 36. Rb4 g5 37. hxg5+ Kxg5 38. Rb5+ Kh4 39. Re5
    Nd4+ 40. Kc3 Rxe5 41. Nxe5 Ne6 42. Nd3 f3 43. b4 g3 44. fxg3+ Kxg3 45. a5 Nf4
    46. Nc5 Kg2 47. Ne4 Nd5+ 48. Kb3 Nc7 49. Kc4 Ne6 50. b5 Ng5 51. Nd2 f2 52. a6
    Ne4 53. axb7 Nxd2+ 54. Kc3 f1=Q 55. b8=Q Qc1+ 56. Kd3 1/2-1/2


2) Traditional plan of equalizing with Ne4. 

This is a very solid idea for Black to equalize. It leads to an exchange of pieces and stops White's ideas of pushing e4, thereby neutralizing White's positional advantage.

A sample line is

  [Event "Traditional plan of equalizing with Ne4"]
  [FEN ""]

  1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. cxd5 exd5 5. Bg5 Be7 6. e3 c6 7. Qc2 O-O 8. Bd3
  Nbd7 9. Nf3 Re8 10. O-O Nf8 11. h3 Ne4


Note that this is a general idea and could be played in many different move orders. Here are some sample Grandmaster games where Black successfully used this idea to equalize and then even went on to win the game. 

Pavel Eljanov vs Yuriy Kryvoruchko, 2013 0-1

Athanasios Mastrovasilis vs Mikhail Gurevich, 2007 0-1

3) Prevent minority attack with a timely b5 and invite White to overextend. 

If Black doesn't employ the earlier ideas, then Black has to passively defend the position a bit longer. However, this often has the added psychological ploy of inviting White to overextend in his/her efforts to win from their "better" position. I found this Grandmaster game where Black manages to prevent the minority attack and White ends up overextending and actually losing the game. 

Pavel Maletin vs Vladimir Malakhov, 2008 0-1

    [Event " Prevent minority attack with a timely b5 and invite White to overextend"]
    [Date "2008"]
    [White "Maletin"]
    [Black "Malakhov"]
    [Result "0-1"]
    [FEN ""]

    1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 e6 5. Bg5 Nbd7 6. cxd5 exd5 7. e3 Be7 8.
    Bd3 O-O 9. Qc2 Re8 10. h3 Nf8 11. Bf4 Be6 12. O-O Bd6 13. Bxd6 Qxd6 14. Rab1 a5
    15. a3 N6d7 16. Rfc1 Rec8 17. Ne2 b6 18. b4 axb4 19. axb4 b5 20. Nf4 h6 21. Qd1
    Nb6 22. Ne5 Nc4 23. Qh5 Rc7 24. Bc2 Ra2 25. Ned3 Rca7 26. Bb3 R2a3 27. Rd1 Bc8
    28. Nc5 g5 29. Nfd3 Bf5 30. Qf3 Bg6 31. Rbc1 Be4 32. Qe2 Bxd3 33. Rxd3 Ne6 34.
    Bxc4 bxc4 35. Rxa3 Rxa3 36. Qb2 Ra7 37. b5 cxb5 38. Qxb5 Kg7 39. Rb1 Rc7 40.
    Qb2 Qc6 41. Rc1 Nxc5 42. dxc5+ f6 43. Ra1 Qxc5 44. Qb8 Rf7 45. Ra8 Qf8 46.
    Qxf8+ Rxf8 47. Ra5 Rd8 48. g4 Kf7 49. Kf1 Ke6 50. Ke2 h5 51. gxh5 Rh8 52. e4
    dxe4 53. Rc5 Rxh5 54. Rxc4 Ke5 55. Rc5+ Kd6 56. Rc3 Rh8 57. Ra3 Ke5 58. f3 f5
    59. fxe4 fxe4 60. Kf2 Kf4 61. Kg2 Rb8 62. Ra2 Rb3 63. Ra8 Rb2+ 64. Kf1 Kf3 65.
    Rf8+ Kg3 66. Rf5 Kh4 67. Re5 Rb3 68. Rxe4+ Kxh3 69. Re1 Kh2 70. Re2+ Kh1 71.
    Re4 Rf3+ 72. Ke2 Rf5 0-1


B) Black's ideas when White develops Knight on e2.

This is actually a more critical line than the Nf3 variation. In his aforementioned DVD, Kasparov claims that the results with Ne2 are in favor of White and looking at the games at the highest level, I have to agree with him. 

Searching through a database, I found that the highest rated player to play this setup with Black was Ivanchuk against Carlsen in 2009. In that game Ivanchuk had to resort to passive defense and Carlsen missed a move which could have given him a decisive advantage.

Carlsen vs Ivanchuk 2009 1/2-1/2

Yusopov beat Portisch in this line way back in 1986 by first defending passively and then embarking on a kingside attack, although this cannot be suggested as a "general idea", so use this with caution.

Portisch vs Yusopov, 1986 0-1

  [White "Portisch"]
  [Black "Yusopov"]
  [FEN ""]
  [Event "Passive queenside defense followed by kingside attack"]
  [Result "0-1"]
  [Date "1986"]

   1. c4 e6 2. Nc3 d5 3. d4 Nf6 4. cxd5 exd5 5. Bg5 Be7 6. e3 Nbd7 7. Bd3 O-O 
   8. Nge2 Re8 9. O-O c6 10. Qc2 Nf8 11. Rab1 Be6 12. b4 a6 13. Na4 N6d7 14. Bxe7 Qxe7 
   15. Nc5 Nxc5 16. bxc5 Rad8 17. Rb2 g6 18. Rfb1 Bc8 19. Nc1 Rd7 20. Nb3 Ne6 
   21. Na5 Nd8 22. Qd1 h5 23. Qf3 Kg7 24. h3 h4 25. Qf4 Rc7 26. Kf1 Rh8 27. Rb3 g5 
   28. Qh2 f6 29. R1b2 Nf7 30. Ke1 Re8 31. Kd1 f5 32. Re2 Qd8 33. Rb6 f4 34. exf4 Rxe2 
   35. Kxe2 Qf6 36. Rb4 gxf4 37. Kd2 Re7 38. Qh1 f3 39. Kc3 Ng5 40. gxf3 Qf4 
   41. Rb1 Nxf3 42. Nb3 Kf8 43. Rd1 Ng5 44. Nd2 Rf7 45. f3 Nxh3 46. Re1 Ng5 47. Re2 Re7 
   48. Rxe7 Kxe7 49. Qe1 Be6 50. Qb1 h3 51. Qxb7 Bd7 52. Qa8 h2 53. Qh8 Nh3


1) New Idea - knight maneuver d7-f8-e6 followed by bishop to b7.  

Nubairshah Shaikh vs Arvindh Chithambaram 2013 0-1

I came across a recent interesting game by India's rising star Arvindh Chithambaran. The idea, as I understand it, is to maneuver the knight to e6, develop the bishop on b7 and then invite White to trade the dark squared bishops. Black can also play f5 considering the fact that the knight on e2 cannot really get to the outpost created on e5. 

   [Event "knight maneuver d7-f8-e6 followed by bishop to b7"]
   [Date "2013"]
   [White "Shaikh"]
   [Black "Chithambaram"]
   [Result "0-1"]
   [FEN ""]

    1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 exd5 5. Bg5 Be7 6. e3 c6 7. Bd3 Nbd7 8.
    Qc2 Nf8 9. Nge2 Ne6 10. Bh4 g6 11. O-O O-O 12. f3 b6 13. Rad1 Bb7 14. Kh1 Rc8
    15. a3 Nh5 16. Bf2 f5 17. b4 Bd6 18. f4 b5 19. Ng1 a5 20. Rb1 Nf6 21. Bh4 Ra8
    22. Nf3 Qe7 23. Bxf6 Qxf6 24. Ne5 Qe7 25. Qb2 Ra7 26. Rfc1 Rfa8 27. h3 Ng7 28.
    Rc2 axb4 29. axb4 Ra6 30. Qc1 Ne8 31. Ne2 Ra3 32. Qd2 R8a6 33. Kh2 Nf6 34. Nc1
    R3a4 35. Rcb2 Nd7 36. Nxd7 Qxd7 37. Bc2 Ra3 38. Nd3 Qe7 39. Bb3 Kg7 40. Nc5
    Bxc5 41. dxc5 Ra8 42. Qd4+ Qf6 43. Rd2 Re8 44. Kg1 Re4 45. Qxf6+ Kxf6 46. Bc2
    Rexe3 47. Kf2 Bc8 48. Bd1 Re4 49. Bf3 Rxf4 50. Re2 Be6 51. Rbe1 Re4 52. Bxe4
    dxe4 53. Rb2 Bd5 54. Rbb1 Ra4 55. h4 f4 56. g3 Ra2+ 57. Re2 fxg3+ 58. Ke3 Ra3+
    59. Kd2 Ke5 60. Re3 Ra2+ 61. Kc3 Kf4 62. Ree1 e3 63. Ra1 Rxa1 64. Rxa1 g2 65.
    Re1 Kf3 66. Kd4 Kf2 67. Ra1 e2 0-1


2) Preventing the Ne2 line altogether by playing an intermediate move 3...Be7!?

    [Event "Black plays 3...Be7!? and White is unable to get both Bg5 and Ne2"]
    [FEN ""]

    1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Be7!?


3...Be7 puts White in a dilemma because White cannot get in both Bg5 and Ne2. White has to try Bf4, but then Black's kingside is not pressured as much as after Bg5. In some lines, Black can once again follow the same plan of knight maneuver to e6 followed by g6 and Bf5. 

     [Event "Sample lines after 3...Be7"]
     [FEN ""]

     1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Be7 4. cxd5 (4. Bf4 Nf6 5. Nf3 O-O 6. e3 Nbd7 7. c5 c6
     8. Bd3 b6 9. b4 a5 10. a3 Ba6 11. O-O Qc8 12. h3 Qb7) (4. Nf3 Nf6 5. Bg5 c6 6.
     e3 Nbd7) 4... exd5 5. Bf4 Nf6 6. Nf3 O-O 7. e3 c6 8. Bd3 Nbd7 9. Qc2 Re8 10. h3
     Nf8 11. O-O Ne6 12. Bh2 g6


P.S. This is definitely the longest I have spent answering a single question on chess.stackexchange.com!