French Defence: Most forcing line for white

Optimissed has formally proven that he's a pedantic guy always walking with the thickest edition of Thesaurus containing only CORRECT meanings!

Rather than boggling my brain with database stats, as a beginner I turn to my beginner's book. He certainly doesn't say that the advance variation is only for GMs. He say:

Exchange variation: "sleep inducing"

Winawar: "extremely messy"

Tarrasch: "gives black options"

Advance variation: generally gives one option, white attack on the kingside, and try to frustrate black's queenside counter attack.

So I reckon Yigor could be right, the advance variation generally "forces" the "one option", so play that!

Sleep inducing exchange LoL. Where are my huge Cambridge and Oxford dictionaries? Is "sleep inducing" equivalent to "forcing to fall asleep"?

If you are forcing us to use your non-strict definition of forcing then, yes, this is correct.

I liked this book quite a lot. 

WARNING: It's aimed at intermediate to advanced players.

http://dev.jeremysilman.com/shop/pc/Fighting-The-French-p3747.htm

The resulting positions are dynamic, and offering chances to both sides.

That's the famous English humour, I guess. Yes, I'm forcing a non-forced definition of "forcing".

Does the sleep inducing variation of French make U fall asleep?

Which is that one? 

Exchange variation.

 Wrong approach. Black can keep it "dull" by maintaining symmetry, but white cannot do the same- Black always has something sound to unbalance the position.

Generally speaking there are dull players, not dull openings.

I find very interesting the exchange variation for White with isolated d4 pawn. Theory claims Black is at least equal if not slightly better but in price to play this position, I don't care. It's like an ancient secret calling for someone to reveal it....

Maybe I need a new Bible, this looks quite exciting:

https://www.365chess.com/view_game.php?g=78808&m=11

Is the gambit 4...c5 an example of breaking symmetry?

The gambit is not 4...c5 but 5...Nf6. It was played only once in master games and it doesn't seem particularly sound.

Apologies, of course 4...c5 isn't a gambit, black can recapture immediately, there is no sacrifice. But, indeed, now I see, by refusing to recapture (5...Nf6) it becomes a gambit because white can now protect that pawn. (But he doesn't...)

So why isn't it sound? Maybe he was trying to encourage white to protect that pawn and damage his position?

As a French player, I beg to differ!

Give me the Tarrasch!  Give me the Exchange!  WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY easier to equalize than against the Advance or 3.Nc3!

Tarrasch is a joke!  Below are 3 URLs that you can copy and past and observe 3 demolitions of the Tarrasch:

http://charlottechesscenter.blogspot.com/2017/02/the-french-revolution.html

http://charlottechesscenter.blogspot.com/2017/03/chess-is-like-stock-market.html

http://charlottechesscenter.blogspot.com/2017/04/doing-household-chores.html

^Every time xD

My old coach, a 2500 GM, was a huge advocate of the Tarrasch, and had a very good winning record with it. Shame it was refuted by ThrillerFan since then

I'd love to have a match with this GM where I get Black every game!

And by the way, I never claimed the Tarrasch was refuted.  I've always claimed easy equality for Black.  White's advantage is ZIP!  At the GM level, it should draw every time!  I forget which database it was, but in the line I play in those 3 games, White's score is 50.2%.  It's roughly 55% in the French Defense as a whole.

As I'm sure you know, I've been a long time advocate of the Advance, and I still firmly believe White can get an advantage in that line, but I'm not stupid, and I know, just like anybody else that plays the French should know, that 3.Nc3 gives White the greatest advantage!

Well, it's natural that 3.Nc3 is best, since it follows the general opening principles the most. 

No clue why some people think that 3.Nd2, develop to a less active square, or 3.exd5, freeing black's bishop for nothing in return, could be objectively better, even if they are fully playable.

It's well noticed about the symmetry. Even in the generally considered as dull Exchange variation, when the position is not symmetrical - it is more interesting to play

If everyone liked the pin after 3.Nc3 Bb4, the 3.Nd2 probably would not be that popular. And although 3.Nc3 does seem to be the best way, the White players need rather deep theoretical knowledge (or to be a genius, if playing without being theoretically prepared) to put problems for Black and to get advantage.