b3 is a weak move, doesnt help white position.
White has to find a way to develop, and then 5.Nc3 is the move, with the idea 5...Qxb2 6.Nb5 with problems for black...
For instance :
Why not playing simply 4...cxd4 5.Bxd4 Nc6 when black already has the upper hand.
More usual for white is c3 before playing Be3 :
5oS, that's a completely different variation.
What a load of nonsense!
The reason ...Qb6 is played in the advance French is fairly simple: pressure against the d4 pawn.
Here the move does what?
Notice that white voluntarily allowed Black to take on d4 without being able to retake with a pawn and retain the central pawn chain...
Unbelieveable!
You see that is exactly why I have Pfren blocked.
He is such a bitter person.
He goes and critizes pouncin on post #3
Says pouncin move is making him Ill?
He goes and critizes FOS on post #6
Says FOS showed a load of nonsense?
Than this is the real kicker lady's and genlemen.
What really ruffles my feathers.
He says statements like the below statement:
The reason ...Qb6 is played in the advance French is fairly simple: pressure against the d4 pawn.
Really?
Is that the only reason it is played?
Oh looky here:
The above position is called French Defense/Advance Variation/Wade Variation
What do you suppose black is doing by playing his queen out early and bishop to d7?
Don't worry I will tell you what black is trying to do.
Black has idea's of playing Bb5 which would trade off his LSB which is considered to be a problem piece for black in the french for whites very active LSB.
Black is using the queen on b6 to help facilitate the exchange.
It seems completely logical doesn't it?
Its completely logical;however, it doesn't matter because IM Pfren said "The reason ...Qb6 is played in the advance French is fairly simple: pressure against the d4 pawn."
Blinders on to the world!
As if Qb6 can help do other things beside pressure d4?
It helps pressure b2.
It helps do a bishop trade.
The queen move is doing so many things and he said it only pressures d4 after critizing 2 people he says this!
OOOO This guy.
You know chess.com has a bug.
The block function is broke.
Its obvious my block function is broken because I still see this guy type.
Poucin and FOS spent at least 30 mins maybe even 1 hour making wonderful post with diagrams and annotations.
Than he comes and trashes everything they said in a 2 second post with 2 little sentences.
Unbelieveable!
To be fair, 5oS' comment looks like a load of nonsense to me too.
[...] Says pouncin move is making him Ill? [...]
I knew that the US education system is flawed, but is it really that bad?
Not the first time, but X_Player didnt read and understand well...
I dont see where pfren criticized what i said, he just said that Qb6 was a bit nonsense, and its not my idea, just idea of the post's author.
If u read my words well, u will see that i dont like Qb6 after 4.Be3 when cxd4 is the move.
I spent about 5 min i think, to write and insert diagrams...
[...] Says pouncin move is making him Ill? [...]
I knew that the US education system is flawed, but is it really that bad?
naturally you would want to turn this into some sort of nationalistic elitism...well after all education systems in all nations are mainly built towards training children obedience towards their nation
xplayer seemed to misunderstand the gist of pfrens comment, which is not any mroe of a mistake than pfren and smyslovs trivial misunderstanding of my own post. But you see the difference...i sneered on the inside about it but saw no reason to make a rude comment about it. you not only wanted to insult xplayer but the education of US citizens in general! such a illuminating difference in priorities.
Nope, western european education systems aren't built like that. They also do not have funny things like "intelligent design" in their schoolbooks. But my point is rather, that a Greek, a Frenchman and a German all seem to understand English language far better than American "x_player".
Your posting may not be so bad where the Tarrasch is concerned, but this thread isn't really about Qb6 in the Tarrasch, but about 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.Be3? Qb6? Here 4...Qb6 isn't "just a move" or "a normal move", it's a bad move. The correct answer to 4.Be3 is 4...cxd4, when black is already better.
Perhaps "structurally better" is more fair... I do not believe white is really worse, he/she just have to be careful as he voluntarily compromised his pawn structure.
But yes, since white did not care to protect d4 with a pawn, then 4...cxd4 is the move any experienced player would play. 4.Be3 actually looks worse than the old dogmatic Nimzowitz lines 4.Qg4?! and 4.Nf3 cxd4 5.Bd3 (both semi-gambit lines).
In my view it's not just the structure but also the loss of tempo involved, whatever takes back on d4 will be attacked with 5...Nc6. I would assess the resulting position to be slightly better for black already, but maybe we are just giving the same thing different names, as in my book "having to play more careful" is one way of being slightly worse.
Regarding 4.Qg4, I think that's quite an interesting and (if you do not know exactly what to do against it) potentially dangerous line. Sure, theoretically black has nothing to fear, with correct play he can equalize, but no more than that. Both lines that you mention are occasionally used by strong players (4.Nf3 cxd4 5.Bd3 is Anne Haast's pet line I think). In my view they are rather in a league with the Kupreichik move than with 4.Be3.
Okay, I did not intend for this to turn out into a debate or anything, it was just a question on whether..qb6 is logicsl and safe or not.
JSYK, ..be3 is not my line nor recommended choice; it was just a move I threw out, and obviously there are better choices.
Qg4 also happens to be another line I'm studying. Any ideas there? :)
[...] Says pouncin move is making him Ill? [...]
I knew that the US education system is flawed, but is it really that bad?
Apparently your education is the one which is suffering!
Look and read the big green title of this forum.
FD:A = French Defence Advanced Variation.
^^ The OP used short hand to talk about the above.
It does not exclusively say 4...Qb6 against 4.Be3.
The people of this forum are commenting towards 4.Be3 only because it was shown in a diagram by the OP
However, The main issue the OP is commenting toward is the move 4...Qb6
Which it can be played in the Advanced Variation under the right conditions!
The problem is the OP does not know when to do it or why its done!
After 4.Be3 the best move in my opinion for black is 4...cxd4.
Which is the whole purpose of playing c5.
As for the below statement:
[...] Says pouncin move is making him Ill? [...]
Apparently you did not read what Pfren said.
I will show it to you so you can read it again.
[...]4...Qb6 looks ill timed to me after Poucin's suggested move 5.Nc3.
^^ You can't play 4...Qb6 after 5.Nc3
Otherwise you would write it as 5...Qb6
The move 4...Qb6 was played after 4.Be3
The move 4...Qb6 is dubious after 4.Be3 simply because you can break the center at move 4 for black.
Thus, Pfren said the move pouncin is showing looks Ill Timed.
Ill timed as a lot of different meanings to different people.
Ill timed = could be a cliche for the phrase " poorly timed or not at this time"
or
He could be saying he is sick at this time.
Which is why I said:
[...] Says pouncin move is making him Ill? [...]
^^^ He did say the word Ill.
^^^He is talking about pouncin diagram and moves.
Not the first time, but X_Player didnt read and understand well...
I dont see where pfren criticized what i said, he just said that Qb6 was a bit nonsense, and its not my idea, just idea of the post's author.
If u read my words well, u will see that i dont like Qb6 after 4.Be3 when cxd4 is the move.
I spent about 5 min i think, to write and insert diagrams...
Your text which I have highlighted in red is simply not true.
I read and understood very well.
You simply don't understand the snide comment which was directed to you by Pfren.
However, Its fine.
I will not try to defend you again.
As for the part where you say its not the first time.
Only time I ever had a disagreement with you was on the Philidor Defence thread.
However, I read and understood very well on that thread.
You made a vague absolute statement.
Which I said was half wrong and half right.
You than told me the below statement
thats because historically, black used to play mostly the Hannam variation, not the exchange...
After you made your statement I didn't feel the need to tell you that your wrong.
Some people like telling other people they are wrong.
I sometimes let things go and just chalk it up as you making a simply mistake.
However, Since you bring it up as if its not my first time.
Than I guess you do not realize your wrong.
You are running under an historical assumption of how the Philidor was mostly only played by using the Hanham variation tabiya.
Which bascially means your wrong for using an historical assumption.
Simply because we live in the modern age.
In the modern age black can play other variations in the Philidor defence if he wishes too.
You being an IM are well aware of this.
Which makes your vague absolute statement half right and half wrong like I said.
If you do not believe me than look at your statement again.
The historical move order has a problem:
^^ Try to show how the Historical move order is wrong if you are planning to play the Philidor Exchange Variation.
If you can't than your statement is wrong.
The OP of the thread used a broad Title.
Look at that thread title again.
X_player you cannot be that dumb, can you?
Your account is 3 days old.
Why should I listen to what you have to say?
You have not said anything to show how I am wrong.
Your account is almost one year old, and I have yet to see anything besides page after page of long-winded muddled half-literate drivel from you. And yet you pick on someone whose shoes you'd never hope to fill.
/quote
[...]4...Qb6 looks ill timed to me after Poucin's suggested move 5.Nc3.
^^ You can't play 4...Qb6 after 5.Nc3
Otherwise you would write it as 5...Qb6
The move 4...Qb6 was played after 4.Be3
/endquote
To anyone with half-decent grasp of English it's obvious that "after" in pfren's quote refers to "looks", not "4...Qb6". As in "4...Qb6 looks ill-timed to me after [I saw] Poucin's suggested move 5.Nc3". Merely a question of stylistics, all the more understandable if you take into the account that pfren probably has to translate from Greek into English on the fly while posting. Yet the vast majority of his posts feature nearly perfect grammar and spelling, something you, flying the stars-and-stripes, can never manage with your "your wrongs" and "its nots". You see now where the "dumb" part comes into the picture?
BTW, these forums really could use an Ignore Poster feature. Isn't there one? The "Block" option is apparently not it.
/quote
[...]4...Qb6 looks ill timed to me after Poucin's suggested move 5.Nc3.
^^ You can't play 4...Qb6 after 5.Nc3
Otherwise you would write it as 5...Qb6
The move 4...Qb6 was played after 4.Be3
/endquote
To anyone with half-decent grasp of English it's obvious that "after" in pfren's quote refers to "looks", not "4...Qb6". As in "4...Qb6 looks ill-timed to me after [I saw] Poucin's suggested move 5.Nc3". Merely a question of stylistics, all the more understandable if you take into the account that pfren probably has to translate from Greek into English on the fly while posting. Yet the vast majority of his posts feature nearly perfect grammar and spelling, something you, flying the stars-and-stripes, can never manage with your "your wrongs" and "its nots". You see now where the "dumb" part comes into the picture?
BTW, these forums really could use an Ignore Poster feature. Isn't there one? The "Block" option is apparently not it.
I am not trying to fill anyones shoes that is your First assumption.
I made an observation nothing more.
If Poucin and FOS don't mind people giving them snide/rude remarks that is completely up to them.
I simply felt it was unwarranted.
They said they spent 5 mins or what ever.
Which is not the point.
They simply miss the point.
It doesn't matter how much time it took them to write the diagrams 5 mins, 5 hours, 5 days etc.
No one has the right to come and look at there hard work and call it a Load of Nonsense.
Constructive criticism have you ever heard of that in the English Language?
Second Assumption:
To anyone with half-decent grasp of English it's obvious that "after" in pfren's quote refers to "looks", not "4...Qb6". As in "4...Qb6 looks ill-timed to me after [I saw] Poucin's suggested move 5.Nc3".
Even if you use your above interpretation.
What Pfren said is still wrong!
The move 5.Nc3 is not a crushing move!
So it shouldn't bother black if he saw that move or not.
The move 4...Qb6 is the "mistake"
Black should of played "4...cxd4 after whites move 4.Be3."
The move 5.Nc3 is irrelevant.
The 4...Qb6 move is bad or "ill timed" no matter what move white plays on move 5.
Pfren saying the move looks "ill timed" after he saw the move 5.Nc3 is wrong.
Its ill timed even if Poucin played 5.Ke2!
If white played the move 5.Ke2.
Guess what?
4...Qb6 would still be bad!
WHY?
Because once white played 4.Be3 blacks best response was 4...cxd4!
Thus, Black will always have an improvement over the move 4...Qb6 in the position.
Even if white played the move 5.Ke2 the only thing which would happen would be both sides made mistakes.
White would of in fact made 2 mistakes
Black would of made 1 mistake.
Whites 2 mistakes would of been 4.Be3 and 5.Ke2
Black 1 mistake would of been 4...Qb6
Third Assumption:
Yet the vast majority of his posts feature nearly perfect grammar and spelling, something you, flying the stars-and-stripes, can never manage with your "your wrongs" and "its nots". You see now where the "dumb" part comes into the picture?
The US is a country of Immigrants Hello?
Even you are a descendant of immigrants.
Do you expect a nation full of immigrants flying the stars and stripes to have perfect grammer and spelling?
What an absurd assumption you are making.
Yes I see the "dumb" parts indeed.
What I find amusing though is how you try to talk about perfect spelling and than have a User name like the one below:
Nebber_Agin
Hmmmm
I guess the US has given alot of cut backs in the English departments.
Never_Again?
Hopeless
Hopeless
This whole thread is nothing but drivel.
First off, in terms of the OP, 4.Be3 is nonsense. 4.c3 is clearly the best move. The only other move occasionally seen is 4.Nf3.
After 4.c3, there is a line with 4...Qb6, and in this case, it's not merely a transposition of moves to attack d4. Often times, Black is looking to play 5...Bd7 and 6...Bb5, and trying to get the early exchange of Light-Squared Bishops.
Most GMs will play 4...Nc6 because they know that anybody who knows what they are doing as White can get an even greater advantage if Black spends all that time trying to rid himself of the Bad Bishop, and in some cases, White can even avoid it with c4-ideas.
As for 5.Be3, which pfren brings up as being a GM's pet line, notice it is "a" GM's pet line, not "the" pet line of GM's. Is it playable? Possibly. Is it better than 4.Be3? Absolutely! Is it good? Uhm...no! It leaves b2 loose, and unlike many lines of the Tarrasch where taking the b2-pawn is poison, White isn't nearly as developed here as he is say, after 11 moves of the closed tarrasch (with 11...Qb6, which can also transpose from 7...Qb6 or 7...cxd4 8.cxd4 Qb6). Black's threats to take on b2 are actually serious in some scenarios. He must always watch out for whether or not White can trap Black's Queen after he takes the Rook on a1, which includes not directly attacking it, but also simply entombing it and literally trapping it only after White has castled.
Why try to re-invent the wheel? 4...Nc6 is clearly Black's best move. 5.Nf3 is White's best after that. Now Black has a few options, such as 5...Qb6, 5...Bd7, and the slightly inferior 5...Nge7. Accept what's correct and go with it!
For my own curiosity...does anyone read all of Xplayers posts? I cant get through them so im wondering.
Legend says that even xplayer can't do it, so...
I never could understand how a thread could dissolve to meaningless arguments in just two pages.
X_PLAYER_J_X:
Your grammar, spelling, and reasoning are all pretty weak. It's very obvious from pfren's post that he was saying that 4...Qb6 is a weak move (ill-timed) because of (after White plays) poucin's suggested 5.Nc3. He was saying that poucin's move, far from being bad, is actually the reason 4...Qb6 is not the correct move.
What is 'would of?' You say it multiple times, but it doesn't actually mean anything. Do you mean 'would have?'
Your logic in saying that it doesn't matter what White plays after 4...Qb6 because Black already made a mistake also does not make any sense. It matters very much what White plays if White wants to take advantage of the mistake! Perhaps this explains why your chess games look so poorly played.
Thank you Veganomnomnom.
For saying the text in red.
Finially someone understands why I am right.
Pfren is saying pouncing move which is played at move 5 is the reason why 4...Qb6 is a bad move.
However, the reason 4...Qb6 is a bad move is because of whites previous move 4.Be3
4.Be3 is "white's mistake"
Black should punish "white's mistake with 4...cxd4".
White should have played 4.c3 "defending the d4 pawn"
White didn't play 4.c3 he played Be3 which means black can punish white by taking on d4 now.
What has happen in the position is a double mistake by both sides!
5.Nc3 is a equal-ish move.
5.Nc3 may be the "best move in the position".
However, It is the best move in a equal-ish sub-par variation.
Simply because they made mistakes prior.
Which means when you go back to review the game and are looking for "improvement"
The "improvement" you will find will happen from these 2 spots (4.Be3 and 4...Qb6).
As for the following statement:
"Your logic in saying that it doesn't matter what White plays after 4...Qb6 because Black already made a mistake also does not make any sense."
? Doesn't make sense you say?
Reread the text again and Think about what I am going to say below:
White can play how many legal moves in the position?
Lets say White can play 20 legal moves at move 5.
Out of the 20 legal moves white can play in this position.
How can any of them absolve Black of playing 4...Qb6 instead of 4...cxd4?
Nothing white can play can change the fact black should have an advantage at move 4 with cxd4.
Which means this whole 4...Qb6 is bad because of the white move 5.Nc3 is rather crazy and wrong.
Scrap the whole continuation.
Play good positions.
OP if you are reading this please realize when you have a chance to play a good position do it!
When ever your opponents play 4.Be3 play 4...cxd4!!
WHY?
Simply because you like Winning and you realize getting an advantage in the position can help you win the game.
If your argument is that we shouldn't be analyzing an opening position where both sides have made an error, I agree. Analyzing after one error makes perfect sense, though.
My agrument was about caring and being friendly to other people.
Showing constructive criticism when you disagree with people.
Something which does not exist on this forum apparently.
Pfren came to the forum and began criticizing people who where trying to help the OP.
The criticism Pfren made to the 2 players on this forum.
Where filled with wrong controversial statements about chess line's.
Pfrens comments were snide and hypocritical.
I believe he was wrong for doing what he did and I showed why his analysis was wrong.
Now that you see he is wrong as well I have nothing further to say about that issue.
Thank you very much Veganomnomnom.
As for the OP:
I know the answer you are looking for.
You had a question in your mind.
The answer to your question is Yes.
4...Qb6 can be playable in the French Defence Advanced Variation.
If you are interested into playing the line.
Research the line known as:
French Defense/Advance Variation/Wade Variation
I showed a diagram of the moves/position on post #7 of this forum.
I even talked about some of the idea's black has in that line.
For more information about the line
Read post #25
In the first 3 paragraphs Thriller wrote.
He was talking about the Wade Variation.
He gave some important tips to be aware of if you do plan on playing it.
I hope that helps my friend.
And as promised, here is the game I just finished, where I played the same opening shown above! :)