Well I usually fumble around with the french defense with black if white plays e4 and this looks pretty much like that except that black has his knight on c6 and is blocking his own c5 pawn break. Google 'french defense introduction' and you should get plenty of stuff to work with (I think exeter chess club has a nice introduction).

A move order would have been helpful.  It looks like the players each played a standard set of opening moves while ignoring what the other did.  It seems White simply repeated Laskers Opening Principles and Black tried a French.  Without a black e5 its nothing like a Scotch.

What were you trying to do?

simple

 

this is a closed game (d4 d5) or a french defence classical variation(e4 e6 d4 d5)

 White should play this against french defence:

two knight defence vs Queen pawn opening

In the diagram posted in the original message one or both sides has deviated from Opening Theory. The position has been reached by plenty of amateurs, but masters would not play to this position.

The Advance is not a killer of the French.  See Watson's work on it. Notice its not a major player at the master level.  It does get boring after awhile since that almost the only line club player use against the French, thus I dumped the French.  Now I switch between a couple Ruy lines, Petroff or whatever sicilian fits my mood. Why would you put your knight on d7, much less fianchetto your Bishops?

ML Advance

 

I can help with that one, as I was playing Black in it and made a mistake early. The move order was 1. Nf3 Nc6?! 2. d4 d5 3. e4 e6 4. Nc3.

 

The question Lurkey is really looking to have answered here is whether the formation White's pieces are in has a specific name, rather than the opening itself. I had suggested that it was a classical centre, but it seems that I was off on that.

You might call this a Queen's Pawn game but it is a mismash.  Black should have played 3. .... de instead of 3.... e6.

Nothing like a Scotch! Oh please. A scotch isn't a scotch without e5!

I think it's like a French oppening (classic french), but black played Nc6 a bit early so white played Nf3 to defend the pawn.

1.e4 e6  2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 (classic variation) Nc6?!   4. Nf3

Anyway, e6 is genuine to the French oppening. if it was some Scotch then the e pawn would have to be on e5, not e6. 

1. Nf3 Nc6 2. d4 d5 3. e4? Is a mistake as Carl pointed out because it allows dxe4.

3. c4 would have transposed to a Chigorin defense.

3. Nc3 is a bit of a mistake too. If you want to punish black for having a knight on c6, play 3. e5. Now the pawn structure is a French Advance, but black can't play ... c5. 

judgeofthenight wrote:

simple

 

this is a closed game (d4 d5) or a french defence classical variation(e4 e6 d4 d5)

 White should play this against french defence:

 

---

 Indeed, black's develepment is less fluid (not destroyed!), but black has always compensation: the pressure on d4 is enough to blalance the odds and cancel out black's lack of develepment. What do you know about the french anyway?!

judgeofthenight wrote:

simple

 

this is a closed game (d4 d5) or a french defence classical variation(e4 e6 d4 d5)

 White should play this against french defence:

 

---

Black can equalize against the french advance...not to mention it's super boring unless white plays something fun like the milner-barry.

In the french (as black) nothing bothers me more than the exchange variation.....ugh

I am never bothered when I see the exchange French. Here is a what a typical game might look like:

 

Of course, I don't typically get as good a position as in the above, but I do have a lot of fun against the French Exchange. Probably because good players don't play it often.

You are correct, most white players who pick the exchange do so because they do not want to learn theory.  There are a few, however, who pick it because it is a completely different game than what most Frenchies are used to playing.

CarlMI, in your experience, do the stronger players who play the French Exchange play it for the IQP setup as white?

 

The groan that I hear from French players about the exchange (and I am not implying that this is Reb's complaint) is that it is boring  because it is symmetrical. I think these players are playing games where after the exchange the 4 knights go to f3, f6, c3, and c6. Then the bishops go out to similar places, both sides castle kingside, maybe there is some action on the e-file. No wonder they find it boring if they are doing this over and over again. But the symmetrical boring mind-numb can't be wholly  blamed on 3. exd5.

 

My guess is that stronger white players are playing 4. c4. And this is much more exciting. 

I love it when players go for the 4.c4 line! Fighting against the IQP is certainly more fun than trading everything on the e-file and waiting for white to offer a draw.

I play the French rarely now, and track it even less.  Admittedly I did play it against a Master a couple months ago in a casual game which I somehow drew.  He mainly made use of the open lines to more quickly apply pressure and mount an attack.  As I said it was a casual game, our first, and as I rarely play OTB, my rating is probably under my real strength and thus he did not play either as strongly as he might have or the more telling lines.

The problem (for me) with the exchange french is that weaker players often play it in order to try and draw. (and weaker can be 2000-2100) So, if I dont want a draw I have to take considerable risks as black to try and win, this is the problem. I dont mind if an IM or GM plays it as a draw for me is fine and probably isnt for them. Lets keep in mind that Kasparov has used the exchange french to beat no les than V Korchnoi, one of the greatest french players in the history of the game. So, when I need to win and face a lower rated opponent I dont play the french unless I can be almost certain they will not play the exchange variation.