Greetings Heidrich. Disregarding the exchange variations, the french normally leads to closed positons unusual to most king's pawn defenses. This is why players comfortable with the d-pawn openings (which generally produce closed positions) often adopt the french defense. Players who excel in open, tactical positions will likely choose the latter. While both openings are theory heavy, more theory is required to play e5 solely because of the complexity of the Ruy Lopez lines, second only in the amount of theory to the sicilian defenses. The french has a straightforward plan of undermining the white center with well-timed pawn breaks, namely c5 and f6. Therefore, you can play it without needing to memorize much theory.
Difference between 1...e5 and the french?
Sort:
You can find as much theory as you want in both openings, and the question's answer is so broad that you will not find a satisfactory answer in a forum. For what it's worth, the French is considered a counterattacking opening and closed, and ...e5 is considered classical and 'open' in most cases. Both can be played in a variety of ways, some more sharp and theoretical, others slower and allow for more preparation before the pieces meet eachother. Hope this helps.
which do you consider more drawish?
The Berlin Defense is often considered drawish, which is an e5 opening, the Zaitsev or Archangaelsk are often considered sharp, both are e5 openings. The French Winawer is as sharp as it gets, and the french fort knoxx is as drawish as it gets. Do you see the point I am making?
The point is, you are asking very general questions about the differences in two openings, after move 1!...chess games last quite a bit longer than that and can change quite a bit in the course of a few moves.
its very difficult to compare 1..e5 and 1..e6 much easier to compare two variations within them, itd be easier if we had some specifics.
Oct 30, 2012
0
#8
vs e5 white can throw a gazillion of gambits on you, and everybody has a pet system against it. in the french you'll get chocked and mated on the kingside 
algorab wrote:
vs e5 white can throw a gazillion of gambits on you, and everybody has a pet system against it.
the trick is to have a pet system against their pet system ;)
I just realized a new player may be a bit incredulous upon hearing that the difference of one little square could actually account for such a difference that no one is able to sum it up for him in one post.
algorab wrote:
vs e5 white can throw a gazillion of gambits on you, and everybody has a pet system against it. in the french you'll get chocked and mated on the kingside
but most of them are only scary the first time you see them, and then only in fast time controls. I agree that the sheer breadth of variations available to the first player is a bit daunting, but the scariest stuff is Ruy Lopez, 2 Knights 4. Ng5, or if you play Bc5 the Evans Gambit. Those you really have to know your stuff. All the obscure gambits, well, they are often one trick ponies right?
Oct 30, 2012
0
#12
A common misconception that people get. 1...e6 tends to be more tactical and agressive in nature than 1...e5. Yes, with 1...e5, White does have a number of wild gambits he can play, but if you compare main lines, the Winawer, McCutcheon, and Classical French are all a lot more tactical than the Chigorin, Breyer, Exchange, or Berlin Ruy Lopez. The Petroff can also lead to wild games, especially those with 3.Nxe5 and 5.Nc3, but I'd say 80% of them are extremely positional.
Of the "Big 4", 1...c5 and 1...e6 tend to be more tactical and agressive, 1...e5 and 1...c6 are slower and more positional, generally speaking. There are exceptions in all 4 cases.
ThrillerFan wrote:
A common misconception that people get. 1...e6 tends to be more tactical and agressive in nature than 1...e5. Yes, with 1...e5, White does have a number of wild gambits he can play, but if you compare main lines, the Winawer, McCutcheon, and Classical French are all a lot more tactical than the Chigorin, Breyer, Exchange, or Berlin Ruy Lopez. The Petroff can also lead to wild games, especially those with 3.Nxe5 and 5.Nc3, but I'd say 80% of them are extremely positional.
Of the "Big 4", 1...c5 and 1...e6 tend to be more tactical and agressive, 1...e5 and 1...c6 are slower and more positional, generally speaking. There are exceptions in all 4 cases.
That's the point though right? You disproved yourself... there are so many many many variations that you can't say "this is more aggressive than that" on just the first move.
Oct 30, 2012
0
#14
I'd like to know how an opening that hands White an advantage like the fort Knox can be more drawish than the zaitsev where black fights to equalize but white has an immediate repetition available with Ng5 =)
Nov 1, 2012
0
#15
Powerlevel_9001 wrote:
algorab wrote:
vs e5 white can throw a gazillion of gambits on you, and everybody has a pet system against it. in the french you'll get chocked and mated on the kingside
You have no idea how difficult, against me, pellik or elubas, or some decent french player such a ridiculous fantasy, this is to achieve. Trust me on this, white may get a massive kingside attack in some games: true, but black's queenside assualt is just as deadly. You are a newbie (atleast the logic appears to be) that clearly has bias against the french, and really assumes your petty logic applies so easily against a strong player that actually understands it.
No, the french actually in my opinion is a sicilian defense, but with more of a closed center. Both players have bad bishops (white darksquared bishop and blacks light squared). In anycase, i would rather not spill any more blood here, as your nonsense might badly influence people away from learning such a counterattacking opening as the french.
i have no bias and i was half joking
Nov 1, 2012
0
#16
waffllemaster wrote:
ThrillerFan wrote:
A common misconception that people get. 1...e6 tends to be more tactical and agressive in nature than 1...e5. Yes, with 1...e5, White does have a number of wild gambits he can play, but if you compare main lines, the Winawer, McCutcheon, and Classical French are all a lot more tactical than the Chigorin, Breyer, Exchange, or Berlin Ruy Lopez. The Petroff can also lead to wild games, especially those with 3.Nxe5 and 5.Nc3, but I'd say 80% of them are extremely positional.
Of the "Big 4", 1...c5 and 1...e6 tend to be more tactical and agressive, 1...e5 and 1...c6 are slower and more positional, generally speaking. There are exceptions in all 4 cases.
That's the point though right? You disproved yourself... there are so many many many variations that you can't say "this is more aggressive than that" on just the first move.
No, I didn't disprove myself. Re-read! I said that 1...e6 "TENDS TO BE more tactical", NOT "IS more tactical".
You can't guarantee a tactical or positional game with any move, but most people will play what tends to lead to their area of strengh more often than not, which is the point I made in the first place. People that assume they can get all these tactical struggles with 1...e5 more times than not are mistaking.
I've had wild games in the Slav, especially after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 dxc4 5.e4, but does that mean that if you have a specific preference for wild tactical games that the Slav is the way to go over say, the Modern Benoni? I think not!
So before you go saying that I've disproven myself, read the context of the statement. If you are unable to do that, go back to English class!
Im basically asking what kind of players would choose to play french and which type would choose to play ..e5. which is more theory heavy?