French Advance, 5...Bd7 (Euwe) or 5...Qb6 true mainline?

I spent 100$ on Chessify to figure it out. For real.

At depth 68 and 765 921 Meganodes or 765 Giganodes if U wish, results were

5... Bd7 (0.11)

5... Qb6 (0.11)

DEAD EQUAL!!!

And not budging, even tho I let it run longer.
Aw well. Until the next fish iteration?

Both are good.
Main line is like fashion.

Better plan: look into the difference between 4… Qb6 and 4… Nc6, as 4… Qb6 5. Nf3 Bd7 (the Wade Variation) is very very strong, possibly stronger than the Paulsen or the Euwe, in fact.

In the French advance, I play the Queen to b6 already on move 4.

5...Nge7 is another very good (and less well known) variation.

If you find the position after 4...Qb6 5.Nf3 Bd7 6.Bd3 Bb5 7.dxc5 Bxc5 8.b4 pleasant, then feel free to play it. It does not appeal at all to me.

Interestingly enough, 6. Bd3 is the only main move against which 6… Bb5 is not best.

6. Bd3 should be met with 6… cxd4 7. Nxd4 Bc5 8. Qg4 Ne7 9. 0-0 Ng6 and Black is doing great.

6. Be2 should be met with 6… Bb5 7. Bxb5+ Qxb5 8. Na3 Qd7 9. Nc2 Nc6/cxd4 and Black is doing great.

6. a3 has 3 similarly rated moves: 6… Bb5, 6… Nc6, and 6… a5. The database and the computer are not aligned on any move in the 6… a5 line, which means it’s not been fully explored and could be worth looking into, 6… Nc6 is a direct Paulsen transposition, and 6… Bb5 (likely best for the Wade players among you) should be met with 7. b4 cxd4 8. Bxb5+ Qxb5 9. cxd4 Nd7 10. Nc3 Qc6, and here again Black is doing great.

4... Bd7 and Nc6 dead equal at 0.13 at depth 68 and two teranodes analyzed. Qb6 virtually identical at 0.19. The moves shuffled at every step all the way. ChessBase server has an analysis putting 4... Nc6 first - all the way to the depth of 84 by "Chupista" using Stockfish 16, but it doesn't display the amount of nodes - nor does it display the second-best move. (When I analyze using CB17 + Stockfish 16, it displays nodes during the analysis, but afterwards I can't locate information of the amount of nodes. I have reached level 60 on my old laptop with 4-cores, but nowhere near the amount of nodes that Chessify's computers could deliver.

I think there is a lot of nonsece discussed here, based on what-ever engine gives equal ideas for various replies for Black. Engines might give you these equal ideas, without knowing anything about recent developments in French defense theory like that from Emanuel Berg in the 2012's or more recent and updated ideas for Black, by David Miedema and Dmitry Kryakvin.

What might seem equal at this move according to your engine, does not provide a plan or even an on-thought development towards the middle game, when all of a sudden your opponent strikes back at you.

I'll give an example later, in another post. Keep playing chess seriously, and analise the 'best move' by you engine with the sincere scrutiny, where it is not just your 'best move', but might not be 'in-sync' with the opening and afterward get you down.

Here is an opening for Black when it is important to play 4. .. Qb6 (4. Nc6 is weaker!) and results in the Millner-Barry Gambit, but where Black goes on to what is better for him.

See my current opening in a chess correspondence game so far, as Black ..

Both are good, but 4...Cc6 is important, 4...Qb6 has the idea to avoid the Kupreichick s Be3 but there s nothing to avoid if you re not facing Kupreichick ;) ,

After this 5...Qb6! Or 5 ..Bd7!

Please let the engines off if you want to progress in chess , one day It Will become useful to improve your variations , maybe at standard club level , somethimg like 1800 ...

This doesn't make any sense to me.

The chess books available seems to be of a much too high level, they discuss variations beginning from move 15 and onwards.

I am at a much more basic level. I need the understanding in the early opening, what positions to go Nh6, Ne7, when to actually push the f6 pawn, when to queenside castle and so on.

The computer allows a lot faster understanding than books. The computer eval drops with a blunder, and remains equal with a move that is a close alternative. When the alternatives are really, really close, I can forget about the understanding, because the numbers arise from comparing the position after numerous tactics and alpha-beta prunings inaccessible to man's mind.

When the computer reduces the eval by a lot, then it is a blunder, and I can start looking at what the other side does to exploit it.

The computer is the best thing ever, and a good friend when there is no grandmaster around to break down difficult analysis.

French defense exchange variation is so bored

That's a very old misconception.

If Black wishes so, symmetry can be broken early on.

iIs the advance varation here, not the exchange ... Mr @GuidoFracassi... please stay clear and aware of what this topic is about.

:devil :devil :devil