French Defence Question

I'm unsure at the moment as to whether the French is right for me and I should instead switch to using the Caro Kann as my main defense. I enjoy playing against the Exchange, Advance and 3.Nc3 variations, but it's 3.Nd2 I'm not as confident against. Against the Advance I play 3.b6 and against 3.Nc3 the Winawer, and after 4.e5 I can play it in "advance variation style" with 4.b6 which both seem to suit my positional style more than the usual messy, dynamic positions which are often created in the mainlines, and I'm usually more familiar with the middlegames than my opponents. However, since against 3.Nd2 it's more unsound to try and take it into a position similar to the advance variation with 3.Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3 b6 it seems I'm either usually forced into the type of positions I hate by playing something like 5.c5 or to play something very solid, yet very passive like the Fort Knox (3.dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bd7). Any thoughts? Should I give it up as my main defense just because of this one variation even though I love playing against the others? 

I will. Thanks.

If you want something off the beaten path for black after 3 Nd2 you should look into 3... a6  and /or  3... Be7 .

 There are 5 moves more popular than 3...Be7 against the Tarrasch. I have been playing both sides of the french defense for 30 years and I have played very few games against 3... Be7.  How long have you been playing it ?

Black has problems to equalize against both 3.Nc3(The main line) and 3.Nd2(the positional line). Against 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 white gets a more pleasant position.

That seems to make sense. Based on Black's pawn structure after 4.exd5 it looks like he hasn't got a particularly "solid" position.

Smbat Lputian and Nigel Short have also played it as black. As well as M Bartel, and Ivan Farago. There are some independent lines for black where they rush their g pawn up the board and these lines are a headache for white. Interestingly, 3.... Be7 scores 48% for black in my database and no other 3rd move does as well or better.  3.... Nc6 is another rather uncommon try against the Tarrasch.

Yes I am aware that IQPs in situations like this aren't "weak" and that they contain strengths and weaknesses. But playing the side with the IQP is usually going to require that you're a good attacker, which I'm certainly not. 

If you dont like the IQP play 4.... Qxd5 in the Tarrasch after 3... c5  4 exd5. Petrosian used to play this a lot and I dont think he ever lost a game with it.

So, all you have to do is play like Petrosian !

Is that it? Why did no-one tell me this before?!

When someone tries to play the Tarrasch Variation 3. Nd2 against me, I just exchange the pawns 3. ... dxe4 4. Nxe4. After the capture, it doesn't matter whether the knight came from c3 or d2, the position is the same. Then I am in the Rubinstein Variation, and, having taken White away from the game he wanted to play, I am on territory familiar to me. The Rubinstein is not the strongest continuation for Black, but it is sound, and my familiarity is most often an advantage. It also has the advantage of being able to be played against both 3. Nd2 and 3. Nc3 interchangeably, which relieves you of having to know a lot of variations.

According to Anand most grandmasters doesn't recognize the french defence as a 100% correct opening, and I agree.

I have played or ran into 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 127 times in 40 years.  3...Be7 appears only twice in all my games.  I tried it against Dave Wolford (rated 2000) in the Dayton Chess Club championship in 1983 and drew in 25 moves (perpetual check), and an opponent tried it against me in a postal game in 2005 and he lost in 42 moves (5 vs 4 pawn engame).  I would say 3...Be7 is off the beaten track for non-masters.

And most of us don't usually play GM's exept Simuls, who cares .

Well, that may be true, but it's been played more than once in the WC semi-finals (Kamsky vs Topalov), and it almost doesn't get any higher level than that, so I'd take it as solid enough.

Opening for white according to Anand volume 6 and 7

 How many volumes did Anand write ? Do you mean chapters 6 and 7 ?

The author of that series is Khalifman, he also has a series on openings for white according to Kramnik, focusing on 1.Nf3. He has written a whole load of stuff within those series, and they are in fact volumes, not chapters, each consisting of 300~pages or so.

Korchnoi used the french in one of his matches with Karpov and didnt lose a single game with it against one of the best ever. Fischer lost several key encounters to the french in his career. Petrosian and Botvinnik both played the french as well and even Tal played it sparingly. Uhlmann played nothing but the french against 1 e4 his entire career I believe and did well with it.....  hhhmmm

The French has been, and always will be, played at the top levels of chess. The question asked, then, is not whether the opening is viable, but rather whether Nuclearturkey should give up on it because of the Tarrasch!

The answer is no. As suggested at the start of the thread (although you say you dislike 5... c5) the 3... c5 line is a good shot. A recent top-level game in this line is McShane - Ni Hua, back in the London Chess Classic:

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1565821

Studying this and other games will give you a feel of what the c5 line is all about.