Caro-Kann Advanced 3...c5

As White, I've been running into this move a disproportionate amount recently:

Now, when I first came across this move, it seemed quite illogical really. After all, it does represent a loss of time, with the c pawn moving twice to get to c5 in the first three moves. But actually, this move has started to earn my respect as a concept now that I've played a few games against it.

Abstractly , Black is waiting for White to advance the e pawn, relieving pressure on the d5 point, before striking with c5 to undermine the White centre. Normally in a CK, c5 will occur later in the game, so why not immediately? There's clearly no concrete way to a clear advantage for White. So actually it makes a great deal of sense, especially since White has already committed to a pawn on e5, to pounce on d4 immediately. And it's difficult for White to pick a reply. c3 tries to maintain the pawn chain but I'm not a fan of the similar French positions where Black can exchange on d4 at will to get some play on the queenside. I've been playing dxc5, fracturing my centre but leading to interesting play.

Really, though,I'd like to hear some views from players who play these positions more often from either side. Although I'm not going to provide any concrete analysis, please feel free to show some lines you think are good.

Here's a recent blitz miniature I won in the opening:

I think every game I've had in this line so far has been unique and different, which is great fun! But, I'd like to see some more typical play.

I know it seems as a waste of time but since its a semi closed structure black isnt really spending as much to counter attack d4. I'm learning the Caro and am considering this line for black. I'm looking forward to some of the strategical related comments on here.

I don't understand this? If black wanted to do this then why would they not just play the French?

This is a good place in general for the Advance Variation but the information on 3...c5 is sparse. 

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1015011

This is interesting, although I don't know how good it is.

wasn't 3..c5 advocated in a major book like the GM repertoire one or something?

In the past when i played the Caro Kann with black I used to play this move. 

First of all though objectively slightly worse then Bf5 it certainly is not a bad move. It has been played by people like Kramnik and Svidler. 

The idea of the opening is basicly to get into a french advance variation with a tempo down and the light squared bishop out. When black manages this black equalizes as the the position of the white squared bishop is more important than the loss of a tempo. 

The normal way to combat this system is to exchange on c5 and play Bb5 )(idea exchanging on c6). White is often able to keep the pawn but in my opinion black is OK since as compensation he gets the bishop pair and a strong center after the logical f6. 

The position i disliked most are the position with a quick c4. 

the Caro-Kann is my favourite opening against e4, The most popular defence is e5, but as black I never play c5

Moonie said:  "The idea of the opening is basicly to get into a french advance variation with a tempo down and the light squared bishop out. When black manages this black equalizes as the the position of the white squared bishop is more important than the loss of a tempo. "

And I think that sums it up well.   The basic design of Caro-Kann is a French without the bad bishop (due to the e6 move in French).   So it can certainly be played with the same strategic goals as a French but leaving that bishop free to move.   

One book I have has a nice concise condemnation of White's e5 move:  "On the surface, white's e5 is senseless.   Unlike in the French Defense, the move has no constrictive effect..."

Isn't c5 just a tempo loss?

It 'loses' a tempo, but the key difference is that ...e6 hasn't been played, so black's light bishop is free to roam by 4...Bf5 for instance, and isn't cramped and bad like in the French.

f5 is possible but even more often the bishop goes to g4 and actively joins the fight for the d4 square by pinning the white knight on f3. 

It's proposed by Jovanka Houska in her book on the Caro Kann. The Schandorff GM repertoire book deals with the main line of the advance.

3. ... c5 is pizza and 3. ... Bf5 is pasta. Both are ok, there are at least 10 sub-variations (toppings) which lead to decent positions for both players. 

I played both of with success, even 3. ... g6 is a tough choice (probably risotto )

Since I opened this thread, I had the chance to (very briefly) get GM Keith Arkell's opinion on the line (it's named after him in some places). I played 4.dxc5 Nc6 5.a3 against him in a simul, and got quite a nice position for a long time (of course, I blundered ).

If anyone's interested, look here:

https://www.chess.com/blog/-waller-/simul-vs-keith-arkell

c6..c5 might be a tempo loss, but isn't e4-e5 a tempo loss as well?

Indeed. As with any variation, it really depends on your own playing style, experience, preferences, knowledge and skill set. Sounds obvious but not many players get to that self awareness aspect of their game until much later on.

For the most part, I agree with Nimzowitch (a pioneer in the CK too lest we forget) that the LB is the problem child better to exchange off with its counter part or Nf3 in many lines of the Caro Kann but yeah, especially in the Advance.

Indeed also, ... c5 is often played anyway in conjunction with ... Bf5 soo ok it is a sound move. As an avid CK player I wouldn't play 3. ... c5 vs the Advance personally, but like I mentioned earlier, it just doesn't suit me.

(probably it's just too committal for me)😉

Don't think so - the pawn can move from c7-c5 in one move, but not from e2 to e5!

Both moves run into 5.a3. After 4...e6 5.a3 Bxc5 6.b4 White retains the e5 pawn, whereas after 4...Nc6 he retains the c5 pawn. I'm not too sure which should be preferred. I guess it should also be noted that 4...e6 blocks the light-squared bishop from developing - Keith didn't do this, but there's a girl in my club that always plays 6...Bf5 in the 4...Nc6 variation.

It definitely commits early if White plays the testing response (i.e 4.dxc5) which requires knowledge from both sides. Often (and when I first played against it) players, especially under 2000 would respond with something safer eg. 4.c3 - if you knew your opponent would play that, maybe you'd have a change of heart?