I think that when you are playing against a player that knows some opening much better than you you should try to avoid that opening.
So let´s say that you are a deticated e4 player with white (like me) and you know that your oponent will play the french defence (1...e6) against you. I have been looking a bit into some different ways to tackle the french and I think 2. d3 instead of 2. d4 is a pretty good choice.
This takes the game away from the "typical" french and white can most likely set up with Nf3, g3, Bg2, 0-0 etc which always is a pretty solid setup for white against many openings.
As always I´m curious about other opinions. What do you all think about this?
Thanks.
Originally posted by thbIs just a harmless variation against the French. Black obtains equal game by a number of methods...
I think that when you are playing against a player that knows some opening much better than you you should try to avoid that opening.
So let´s say that you are a deticated e4 player with white (like me) and you know that your oponent will play the french defence (1...e6) against you. I have been looking a bit into some different ways to tackle the french and I ...[text shortened]... gs.
As always I´m curious about other opinions. What do you all think about this?
Thanks.
Challenging the French with principled set-ups is much more interesting than the KIA and will reward both White and Black with a much more interesting game...
Originally posted by thbIt's been well studied. It's called the King's Indian Attack vs the French. Bobby Fischer used to use it. French players get really annoyed by it.
I think that when you are playing against a player that knows some opening much better than you you should try to avoid that opening.
So let´s say that you are a deticated e4 player with white (like me) and you know that your oponent will play the french defence (1...e6) against you. I have been looking a bit into some different ways to tackle the french and I ...[text shortened]... gs.
As always I´m curious about other opinions. What do you all think about this?
Thanks.
I used to play it. Now I have a different unconventional attack against the French which I find is more fun and even more unconventional. I sacrifice my d Pawn and sometimes my c Pawn for development and hit the Kingside fast and hard.
I've tried the KIA against the French in a few blitz games and it works out OK. The main advantage is just what you said, it avoids the main lines that your opponent will undoubdetdly know better than you (unless you are a French player, of course). I have been playing a French Exchange lately, with mixed results, but open positions.
1. e4 e6
2. d4 d5
3. exd exd
4. c4 ... and it is wide open
Originally posted by BLReidThis system is not reliable for White. After 4...Bb4+ it is very difficult to suggest anything resembling a plan to White...
I've tried the KIA against the French in a few blitz games and it works out OK. The main advantage is just what you said, it avoids the main lines that your opponent will undoubdetdly know better than you (unless you are a French player, of course). I have been playing a French Exchange lately, with mixed results, but open positions.
1. e4 e6
2. d4 d5
3. exd exd
4. c4 ... and it is wide open
Originally posted by AlopintoWith respect, I humbly disagree. The whole point of this variation is to avoid the closed lines that black is undoubtetly hoping for in the French. You can follow 4...Bb4+ with 5 Nc3, at which point black has the option of trading his bishop for whites knight...rather unappealing in such an open position. This is going to be a tactical battle. As far as being unreliable, well, I did say that I have had mixed results. But, as with most games played below the 2000 level, I believe that the player who is better tactically will win this battle. At any rate, it avoids the Winawaer, Tarrasch, and Advanced variations of the French without a heck of alot of preparation. 🙂
This system is not reliable for White. After 4...Bb4+ it is very difficult to suggest anything resembling a plan to White...
Originally posted by BLReid
With respect, I humbly disagree. The whole point of this variation is to avoid the closed lines that black is undoubtetly hoping for in the French. You can follow 4...Bb4+ with 5 Nc3, at which point black has the option of trading his bishop for whites knight...rather unappealing in such an open position. This is going to be a tactical battle. As far as being ...[text shortened]... awaer, Tarrasch, and Advanced variations of the French without a heck of alot of preparation. 🙂
With respect, I humbly disagree.
The whole variation 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 exd5 4.c4 Bb4+ has the blessing of IM John Watson in his book Play the French. His analyses prove an advantage in almost every line for Black. In practice I have tested his recommendation on a USCF rated game against a ~1900 [I was 1805 at the time] and managed to beat him soundly.
My opponent cited IM Josh Waitzkin as the expert of the whole concept for the White side. While I haven't seen any games by Waitzkin using this variation, I can atest for having positive results defending the Black side against this exchange variation both in blitz games and in serious tournament practice.
The whole point of this variation is to avoid the closed lines that black is undoubtetly hoping for in the French.
Whenever I play the French I do not hope for closed lines but a blocked pawn structure. Furthermore, I am happy to enter the Winawer main line a pawn down to aim at White's king in a tactical fight.
...it avoids the Winawaer, Tarrasch, and Advanced variations of the French without a heck of alot of preparation.
Yes it does... But at the cost of structural problems (i.e., a likely isolani) and giving Black the chance to get equality at no cost. In my opinion, the most principled way to tackle the French is the Tarrasch that demands little prep work for the White side if very basic principles are kept in mind.
I say play the exchange followed by c4, which turns the normally closed and methodical French into an open game, usually not to the liking of most French players. Your idea of avoiding a player's prefered opening has another variant...make him play a version of his prefered defense that he doesn't prefer.
"Whenever I play the French I do not hope for closed lines but a blocked pawn structure."
Forgive my ignorance, but what is the difference between a blocked pawn structure and a closed game? Unless of course you are referring to blocked wing pawns, with no center pawns, which I have never encountered in most typical French positions. I did a little (very little) research and found that the numbers appear to agree with your dislike of this line. Chesslab.com reports W33%,B23%,D31% in games from 1991 to present with ELO's >=2200. If you change the parameters to look at all games from 1485-1990 though, you get W61%,B23%,D16%. Perhaps I am too optimistic, but I think that this would be more accurate of typical amateur play. As stated by my friend KWCorona, you are taking black into a variation of his preferred opening that he doesn't prefer. ie: He probably isn't expecting/prepared for it until you approach higher levels. It's just the kind of opening that many authors (and a few strong players who have guided me to some improvement) think amateurs should play for if they want to improve their tactical play. I'm not saying that I've read any author endorsing this particular line, but I have read many that suggest playing for open positions whenever possible. I'm no student of openings, this line was suggested to me by a rather strong player when I was looking at the exchange variation as an option. The line I was originally considering was 2. Nf3 d5 3.exd exd 4. d4 which is less risky, but probably isn't going to win any brilliancy prizes in the near future.
BLR
Originally posted by BLReid"what is the difference between a blocked pawn structure and a closed game?"
"Whenever I play the French I do not hope for closed lines but a blocked pawn structure."
Forgive my ignorance, but what is the difference between a blocked pawn structure and a closed game? Unless of course you are referring to blocked wing pawns, with no center pawns, which I have never encountered in most typical French positions. I did a little (very ...[text shortened]... h is less risky, but probably isn't going to win any brilliancy prizes in the near future.
BLR
In the French generally the central pawns are blocked and you have the thematic breaks of c5 and f6 with Black keeping the game open. When you exchange at d5 the character of thegame is still open but the central pawns are blocked. In the Sicilian you have a number of breaks that make the pawn structure more fluid and open.
"The line I was originally considering was 2. Nf3 d5 3.exd exd 4. d4 which is less risky, but probably isn't going to win any brilliancy prizes in the near future."
This line you mention is endorsed by none other than Kasparov 😀 and I consider it better than the system with c4 with all due respect 🙂
I consider database statistics a poor indicator on the merit of a line: Either I understand and like what I am doing or I don't play it. Of course, all your arguments make sense against a player that just started playing the French and discovered the joys of the classical French or the double edged Winawer but against a well prepared and seasoned player of the French the exchange variation is a sure path to give Black equality.
Does this mean that the French exchange is bad? Not at all! Players that choose to play it have excellent models to follow (Larsen, Kasparov, etc.) and may become experts in this particular way of playing
😀