Here is a preliminary look at GM Schandorff’s anti-Noteboom repertoire idea in Playing 1.d4 The Queen’s Gambit 2nd Ed(Quality Chess 2012).

The first edition suggested the 8.Rb1 sideline but in the 2nd edition, Schandorff has presented a more positional idea in the main line-13.c5!?

I looked at Schandorff’s proposed TN(21.d5!) and his other ideas. Now I’m happy I get the basics and this will have to do for now.

Lomineishvili,Maia (2401) – Melnikova,Yana (2171) [D31]
EU-ch (Women) 5th Dresden (2), 22.03.2004[Yip]
1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c6 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.a4 Bb4 6.e3 b5 7.Bd2 a5 8.axb5 Bxc3 9.Bxc3 cxb5 10.b3 Bb7 11.bxc4 b4 12.Bb2 Nf6 13.c5 The idea is to play Bb5-a4 to blockade the queenside passed pawns (Diagram) 

Position 1
Black has just played 18…Ne4 to extend the light square blockade idea to the center.
Q1-What do think of black’s idea?
Q2-How should white react?

White to Play

Playing the Queen’s Gambit
The second edition is out from Quality Chess.

The big question is what’s the difference? More games have been added and the analysis strengthended.
table.tableizer-table { border: 1px solid #CCC; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; } .tableizer-table td { padding: 4px; margin: 3px; border: 1px solid #ccc; } .tableizer-table th { background-color: #104E8B; color: #FFF; font-weight: bold; }

Breakdown by Chapter
10 new games have been added. The big difference is also in the line against the Noteboom(D31) where a more positional main line has been added while keeping the older 8.Rb1 recommendation.
table.tableizer-table { border: 1px solid #CCC; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; } .tableizer-table td { padding: 4px; margin: 3px; border: 1px solid #ccc; } .tableizer-table th { background-color: #104E8B; color: #FFF; font-weight: bold; }