Reb wrote:
I would like to add that my wife, also a francophile, prefers the classical 3... Nf6 and she has kindly pointed out to me that all winawer players are simply nuts....
Well, that settles it then... 
French defence - Easy draw for black?
Sort:
I play 7 ... 0-0 Simply because it just seems easier to play for me, I play the French defence to try not to lose the game, that is my objective, and I think that that line reaches that objective the best.
When I realised that if I play the French Winawer I am supposed to be playing the aggressive lines, I had a look at the classical, but for some reason (I'm not quite sure what) I thoroughly dislike the positions I get into in that line, and they seem to favour white more than white is favoured in my 7 ... 0-0 Winawer.
An example game of how 7 ... 0-0 can work.
A game against Rybka, I gave myself 10 minutes and it just the 1, this may have been too much of a handicap tbh, will try again later with 10 minutes each.
Gareth_Smith wrote:
I play 7 ... 0-0 Simply because it just seems easier to play for me,I play the French defence to try not to lose the game, that is my objective, and I think that that line reaches that objective the best.
When I realised that if I play the French Winawer I am supposed to be playing the aggressive lines, I had a look at the classical, but for some reason (I'm not quite sure what) I thoroughly dislike the positions I get into in that line, and they seem to favour white more than white is favoured in my 7 ... 0-0 Winawer.
An example game of how 7 ... 0-0 can work.
A game against Rybka, I gave myself 10 minutes and it just the 1, this may have been too much of a handicap tbh, will try again later with 10 minutes each.
If your main goal is to not lose then the caro kann is better suited than the french for that purpose.
Reb wrote:
Gareth_Smith wrote:
I play 7 ... 0-0 Simply because it just seems easier to play for me,I play the French defence to try not to lose the game, that is my objective, and I think that that line reaches that objective the best.
When I realised that if I play the French Winawer I am supposed to be playing the aggressive lines, I had a look at the classical, but for some reason (I'm not quite sure what) I thoroughly dislike the positions I get into in that line, and they seem to favour white more than white is favoured in my 7 ... 0-0 Winawer.
An example game of how 7 ... 0-0 can work.
A game against Rybka, I gave myself 10 minutes and it just the 1, this may have been too much of a handicap tbh, will try again later with 10 minutes each.
If your main goal is to not lose then the caro kann is better suited than the french for that purpose.
I actually agree with this, having studied both openings. I chose the Caro because for a start, at the low level I play at openings are not very relevant and so I would prefer something that will not have me blown off the board against a tactically stronger player. Secondly, the philosophy behind the Caro is to gain a solid position, defend accurately, and come out with a superior position with very few chances of losing. Then, with better endgame play (studying endgames is my favourite part of chess) I can have very good chances with the caro.
I hate it when my opponent plays e5 when my opening was e4. Most of my games ended in a draw.
Gareth_Smith wrote:
I play 7 ... 0-0 Simply because it just seems easier to play for me, I play the French defence to try not to lose the game, that is my objective, and I think that that line reaches that objective the best.
When I realised that if I play the French Winawer I am supposed to be playing the aggressive lines, I had a look at the classical, but for some reason (I'm not quite sure what) I thoroughly dislike the positions I get into in that line, and they seem to favour white more than white is favoured in my 7 ... 0-0 Winawer.
An example game of how 7 ... 0-0 can work.
A game against Rybka, I gave myself 10 minutes and it just the 1, this may have been too much of a handicap tbh, will try again later with 10 minutes each.
I think there's a lot of improvements to be found for White (Rybka) ... but my main criticism of Rybka's game is 14.h4 and then 16.0-0?! Really? Rybka plays it like that? My human intuition is that h4 is intended to break up black's kingside with an eventual h5 -- and my engine (Fire) likes 16.h5 a lot more than 0-0.
its wierd you sure it was 3000 ELO?
Yes, Watson is the one who recomends ...0-0 apparently. It's certainly not as fiery as something like ...Qc7, but that would probably lead to an edge for white as well, wouldn't it? But black's counterplay is certainly there.
A while ago I learned that positions that seem to be badly under attack can turn out to be extremely resilient with a good defensive player (like grandmasters)... or can fall apart within about 3 moves, all depending on the skill of the player! Black's got pieces aiming at his kingside but his pawn cover is perfect and he also has a knight coming to g6 and queen c7 defending 2nd rank for perhaps just adequate defense. A full pawn cover can really hold up sometimes (though when black plays ...f5, things become all the more complicated). Once pieces start to come off, white's pawns really do look quite weak sometimes, not that black can't or shouldn't attack them earlier on a little!
"7 ...0-0 8 Bd3 and Black may be able to defend, but where is his active counterplay? This is not a serious defense by any means, and certainly not an attempt which conforms with the ideas behind the French."
I already mentoined this. Black puts his trust in white's pawns and his possibilites in the center with ...f5 (in fact I quite like the 8 Bd3 f5 line, watson also offers 8...Nbc6, brings the queen to c7 to defend against possible Ng5 or Bh7 moves, and after ...f5 black's k side is a bit loose but holding up) and possible opening of lines like the f file. Lots of times he plays for a dynamic ...e5, when he has space playing against white's bishops dangerously eyeing the kingside, but still not quite being able to tear the wall down It's quite possible white gets in edge (though watson is biased enough to claim edges for black a lot!), I mean honestly I have no idea, and probably no one else does. It's just really complicated (though unlike the poisoned pawn a lot of that comes from white's k side attack, but black has different goals in ...0-0 line so that doesn't necessarily make his game any worse by compaison) and hard to refute, like a lot of openings. It's simply different.
Is it in the spirit of the french? That's up for debate. Personally I think so, he gets plenty of long term counterplay but really it doesn't matter. It's extremely playable in practical chess and it seems to be played as much as ...Qc7 these days. I mean in the recent winawer games I saw white seems to be just playing the "positional" lines, and if people are not always using Qg4 they seem to think black is ok enough.
My edition of Watson's book has him press . . .Qc7 in that position, as it leads to what is in his estimation the most interesting positions in the French defense.
About the game again... I dunno it seems pretty hard to believe that one could draw rybka as black, being an amateur. In fact, the fact that it's blitz should give rybka even more of an edge, as it will still basically never blunder even having to move very quickly! Honestly it kind of looks like rybka vs rybka blitz game.
The guy seems like he's trying to be genuine, but there's just no way I can believe it when rybka can see insane tactics from literally the dullest position (which can crush most gm's, especially if rybka has white), then the guy goes on to draw him in a winawer? Seems a little impossible 
rednblack wrote:
My edition of Watson's book has him press . . .Qc7 in that position, as it leads to what is in his estimation the most interesting positions in the French defense.
I think he did that in the 2nd and 1st editions. I have the 3rd edition, the most recent version unless he made another behind my back.
You're right, Elubas. I have the 2nd edition. It's surprising to me that 7. . .0-0 is recommended now, as I've had much better luck playing 7. . .Qc7. Then again, the game I play is just a little under the level of the likes of Watson 
Thanks for clearing that up.
A little french game of mine,with the black pieces:D
Enjoy
sidpn wrote:
A little french game of mine,with the black pieces:D
Enjoy
lol, it's not a meal.
GarGarGar wrote:
I decided that I was fed up with playing e5 as a response to e4, and when I played c5, the positions generated were getting very complicated and I decided to find a simple, more drawish defence. So I had a look at the french defence I looked over some of the lines and decided that I liked the Winawer.
lol
GarGarGar wrote:
Also, do you think that both sides were correct to draw in this position?
lol
Fezzik wrote:
Nicely played! I love to see the French battle to victory!
I had the same experience with Crafty 19.1
The computer bugs at certains positions - after all anyone who understands the software will know that the evaluation function is in fact a set of weighted generalizations, for some reasons the need to repeat positions out-weighed or had a greater numerical value than the need to prevent a draw, its one of those things that can happen in rare positions.
Its interesting to think that (in the case of gnu chess) a computer gives a knight extra points for being in the center of the board, and an extra point for each square away from each king, so an ideally valued knight is in the center and next-to both kings. The computer also evaluates king safety, based on the opponents ability to check etc, overall the whole concept can become ridiculous in strange positions, and in fact I would guess that the computer would have flaws in some positions (and it still does).
I would like to add that my wife, also a francophile, prefers the classical 3... Nf6 and she has kindly pointed out to me that all winawer players are simply nuts....