How to bust the french defence???

Hi friends, ever since I was crippled in a match with a GM, I have been looking for a bust for the opening....

I found this link which seems to claim that it actually "busts" it

http://www.thechessmind.net/storage/chess-posts/2_be2_french_1.htm.

And by the way, the opening went so painful that I rewalized that I was in no equality:

So.... please help me with plausible replies trhanks in advance!

An easy way to play to play the french would be the exchange variation. 

6. dxc5 is probably where you went wrong. It's not a move played at the GM level and the few attempts in my database (ChessBase MegaBase 2012) score poorly. 7. Be3 is a definite error, but you were already in bad shape.

6. a3 c4 7. Nbd2 is a typical continuation from that position.

Grischuk has a number of games continuing 6. a3 that are worth looking at, he does very well on the white side of the French.

Then one playing the French should always thrive?! Not practical.....

If you're going to allow the French, then you need to have a line to play against it. The Advance french is a fine choice, but you have to know the critical positions and ideas. There's not a lot of good sidelines here, there's really only 3 main ideas:

6. a3 -- which is currently the most popular way of playing it at the highest levels.

6. Be2 -- the old main line

6. Bd3 -- where you better know the theory like the back of your hand 'cause it's game on :)

Thanks guys... I was thinking..... How about the beloni with a mirror french???

Get back to us when a super-GM (not some unknown nobody) announces a "bust" to the FD or any other well-estb. opening. BTW we won't be holding our collective breathes

There is no way to "bust" an opening like French defense.Your game clearly shows poor understanding of the pawn structure so if you want to play against French defense better maybe try to understand it instead of trying to find a good line against it.

    Anyone who suggests a line as a "buster" obviously doesn't understand a thing about French defense and probably very few about chess.

Am I missing something? Nepal doesn't even have any GMs.

http://ratings.fide.com/topfed.phtml?ina=1&country=NEP

The highest-rated player is 2127.

"Nepal buddhi chal sangh" translate: Nepal chess federation is our parent for all the data as well as titles. And we HAVE more than a dozen GMs assosiated in this assosiation. The highest FIDE title Nepal has won is "FM" FM Manish Hamal(he was the first).

dued try the tarrarch.

If he doesn't want to learn 6 moves of the advance, why recommend a more theoretically deep variation?

:)

well that is a good question. I like it because I don't have to deal with Bb4 now.

just like Carlsen and Nakamura playing the KG didn't Naka play that in the Tal Memorial. which considering the name you would think it would have been accepted.

Sure - I'm not saying it's bad. It's a great variation with a lot of things going for it. But you have to know the theory pretty deep if black goes for the 3. ... Nf6 variation, which is the most common continuation.

Granted, a lot of black french players will bail out to a Rubenstien variation with 3. ... dxe4 or go for the 3. ... c5 playing for the less theoretical lines. But White generally won't know that before choosing to play Nbd2.

I realize that computers aren't very good in the opening, but after:

1. e4 e6 2. Qe2 c5 3. Nf3 Be7 4. Nc3 Nc6

Stockfish recommends 5. Qd1 with a score of -0.28.

I'm pretty sure that is all I need to know about that variation :)

I'm not saying it's unplayable, I'm saying that it's doesn't seem like a reasonable continuation compared to mainline french variations in terms of trying to play for a win with white.

Lets get back to the mentioned line which is fine (since I play it against F.)

If black tries to win a pawn he loses 6...cxd4 7.cxd4 Nxd4 ?? 8. Nxd4 Qxd4 ?? Bb5+ and game over. Even in the case 6.dxc5 Bxc5 7 Qc2 Nge7 ?? 8.b4! and black can only give figure for two pawns.