french defence exchange monte carlo variation -- taking the pawn

One variation that french players universally hate is probably exchange variation. I especially hate the monte carlo variation out of all possible exchange variation, simply because I don’t know an appropriate response to it. I’ve combined some ideas that we see in Queen’s gambit declined meran variation to monte carlo and had a good result. Do you people think that what I did was a possible inaccuracy/mistake? If not, is there a name for the variation that I played?

I used to dislike the Exchange variation ("kills the fun and the usual strategical plans") until I discovered how Alekhine played it (though I prepared something else on the 4.c4 variation). Now, when my opponent plays 3.exd5, I make sure he gets through rough times...

Regarding your game, I see nothing special until your opponent blunders though I'm not comfortable with the c6 b5 plan. Probably because I'm not a Meran player. I think it is a matter of taste, I cannot see a concrete way for White to take any advantage of the backward c-pawn and (maybe) that the b-pawn can also be used to misplace White pieces after ...b4 at some point.

In the position at move 8, I would have probably played ...0-0 followed by ...Nbd7, ...dxc4 with the idea ...Nb6 on Bxc4 to overcontrol the d5 square in front of the isolani and only then ...c6 followed by ...Nbd5.

Then Bg4 pinning the Knight in e2 or f3 may also be used in hope of h3, after which you can relocate your Bishop in f5 which would put pressure on this h3-hook after ...Nd5-f4 and maybe the help of Black Queen along the light-squared diagonal. It's just a general idea.

Against c4, I like playing like this:

The bb4ch and qe7ch is what I like against this c4  line too. I think it pretty much kills the c4 idea, as a try for an advantage.

Black can't make White go trough "rough" times if he plays the Exchange.

To answer the OP's question, I consider the Monte Carlo as an inferior opening.

The idea of playing c4 is a good one, and reminds most of us to the Panov Attack, the only difference being that different files are opened.

In the Panov White opens his e-file but Black's e-file remains closed.

In the Monte Carlo the e-file is opened for both sides, meaning that whoever castles first will probably have a more comfortable game. Therefore I recommend rapid development with Bb4+, you develop a kingside piece while forcing White to block with a queenside piece.

That should give you a comfortable middle game as White has to be careful not to get deadly checked along the e-file.

Greetings.

Thanks Merovwig, I will use that line against the monte carlo from now on.

Why not?

Thanks for the response. From now, I will give bishop check first for rapid development. 

Well, you should better play something you are comfortable with. If you play Bb4+ and you have not even a vague idea of what "rapid development" will be after move 4, it will not be an improvment. ;)

Black does not make the exchange in the first place.

Common sense I guess.

If stupid things like the Scandinavian are still alive why would exd5 be problematic for White? I dont know if exd5 would even be considered principled (does nothing for development and exchanges pieces without a clear reason, helps Black develop his bishop etc..)and it is certainly not the best move in the position but  I don't buy that  Black can "punish" white.

We are all the same level of amateurism nimco, didn't they tell you?

Don't fool yourself.

I play the French exclusively against 1. e4 and I love the exchange variation! Having a freed-up LSB without having to learn all the theory after 1...e5 is great!

In answer to your question, I think the main idea of taking on c4 would be to inflict an IQP, rather than making White lose a tempo (if you could even call it that as the bishop isn't exactly bad on b3). After inflicting an IQP on White, I believe the plan usually should be to blockade the d5 square and simplify the position, then win the endgame. The problem you might get with c6, b5 etc. is that (as someone already mentioned) the c pawn is backward and on an open file, so might come under a lot of pressure. Furthermore, as the LSB isn't restricted by a pawn on e6, there's less of a need to create space to develop it on b7.

Just my two cents though, I don't have very much experience in this variation and haven't tried it out for myself so I'm just speculating.

I don't think I wrote "punish".

When I say "rough times", the idea is that I picked up variations which prevent him from castling in most of them with a big pressure on his King, with a lot of room for mistakes on White side, and (slightly) tricky moves on the board (see diagram above in # 2).

In comparison with the Exchange variation at our level of play where nothing happens until the endgame unless one of the opponents blunders or falls asleep, I guess I can call it "rough times".

I don't think scandinavian is stupid.Scandinavian is a quick way to equalise.It is played by many GM's .Even Nakamura use it in few of his games.

Well, World's no.1 used the Scandinavian against world's no.2 in three instances so far. He got a plus one score: a draw first time with 3...Qa5 (it was a blitz game), a win with 3...Qd8 in a very important Olympiad game, and another draw at the recent Olympiad with 3...Qd6.

Caruana jokingly said that if Carlsen plays 3...Qe5+ next time, then he has great chances to win!

How "stupid" such an opening can be?

To the subject: Black can unbalance the position with little risk in the exchange French, and after that whoever plays better, wins. I believe Fischer had an aphorism on the exchange French, something like "whoever makes the first mistake will lose the game" (can't recall exactly).

True.

I've been having great fun the the French Exchange Monte Carlo. It really is the most brutal way to attack the French, in my opinion. But, as always, there are pros & cons.

White thinks it's going to be a dull as hell Exchange, but Black has other ideas. The main ones being to blast the centre open, and support and develop around Black's IQP, which can sometimes be used to spearhead an attack.

For instance...