Nothing. 3...c5 is a better move, and most often played. As a French Tarrasch player, I find 3...c5 to be by far the most annoying move. 3...a6 and 3...Be7 are a little suspicious, and I have great results against 3...Nf6. 3...c5, is definetely best.
French defense (Tarrasch)
Sort:
Even though I have preferred 3 ... Nf6 for several decades I have to admit I believe 3... c5 is better and maybe I will switch to that soon .
Mar 9, 2015
0
#4
In response to post 2, the comment afer 5...Nf6 of "An White stands well" is inaccurate. "And Black stands well" is more like it.
The average score in chess is 54% for White. The French as a whole scores about 55.25% for White.
After 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2?! (3.Nc3 is strongest, 3.e5 next. All other moves get White equality at best - proof is below) 3...c5! 4.exd5 exd5 5.Ngf3 Nf6! (Far stronger than the old 5...Nc6 which gives Black a miserable game where he has nothing more to fight for than a draw) 6.Bb5+ Bd7 7.Bxd7+ Nxd7 8.O-O Be7 9.dxc5 Nxc5 10.Nb3 Nce4!, White has a miserable 50.7% score across 288 games.
Compare this to lines like:
3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Ne7 7.Qg4 (White's strongest move) - This position scores 56.4% across 3353 games.
3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 and now:
- 5...Qb6 6.a3! scores 54.15% across 2397 games.
- 5...Bd7 6.Be2! scores 54.3% across 1447 games.
Sveshnikov has been a live-long e4 player, and even he acknowledges that the Tarrasch is a mistake for White and gets White nada!
Note that all of these are based on large, valid sample sizes (a valid sample is defined as 30 or more in statistics). The 288 is a little lower than the other samples because it wasn't long ago that it was discovered that 5...Nf6 was truly that much stronger than 5...Nc6. It was originally thought to be merely a matter of taste.
Thriller Fan,
I understand your views about the ... inferiority of the French Tarrasch. However, great players such as Garry Kasparov have played the French Tarrasch as white, and have had excellent results with this opening. Now, the French Tarrasch has some obvious cons, but also some obvious pros.
3.Nc3: You are an adamant supporter of 3.Nc3. Perhaps 3.Nc3 really is best ... I'm not experienced enough to know. But there are two major drawbacks to 3.Nc3:
(1) 3.Nc3 is very heavy in theory, because black has many options against it. For instance, there is the Classical French, with all its variations and sub-variations. Just look at the Alekhine-Chatard Attack for instance!
(2) It allows the Winawer. The Winawer is truly a deadly and dangerous weapon against 3.Nc3. It gives Black the initiative (indeed, players seem to play the French to get the initiative) and is highly complex. Bobby Fischer famously had much trouble with the Winawer, when facing it from the White side. I am by no means saying it is a bad opening, I am merely saying that White has a very hard time dealing with it.
3.e5
This is the line I used to play against the French. I stopped. Why?
(1) From the get-go, black gets the initiative, and starts undermining white's overextended (?) pawn strucuture, with 3...c5. From the beginning of the game, black will be delivering constant blows to White's pawn strucuture, and white must defend carefully.
(2) White may have a space advantage, but because black can undermine it with ...f6, I don't think it is worth too much. You will hear French players say, time and time again, that there favorite variation of the French to fight against ... is the French Advance. Indeed, when I played the French, I rejoiced when I saw the French Advance.
3.Nd2
The French Tarrasch, and my favorite.
(1) The Tarrasch immediately avoids the Winawer, due to c3. It establishes a very flexible position, when black remains cramped (in the 4...Qxd5 variation) or has open lines, but not much piece mobility (in the 4...exd5 variation). White's d2 knight has many places to go. It can go to b3, to g3 via f1, and, rarely, even to f3. The d2 knight obviously protects the f3 knight.
(2) Above were the pros, here are the cons. Nd2 blocks in the c1 bishop. It also blocks the queen's defense of the d4 pawn. But besides that, it doesn't do much.
3.exd5!?
The French Exchange, as your correctly pointed out in countless threads, is pretty much equality. That is to say, if White plays normally.
However, if White plays the swashbuckling Qf3-Ne2 system, all of a sudden White's chances are much better. Indeed, 'tis not by coincidence that this has recently become white's favored way of playing the Exchange French.
Conclusion:
The Advance Variation and 3.Nc3 both play into Black's hands insofar as you hand over the initiative. With the French Tarrasch and Qf3 Exchange, however, you are the one with the initiative. Often, it is black who has no active plans.
TasmanianTiger wrote:
3.exd5!?
The French Exchange, as your correctly pointed out in countless threads, is pretty much equality. That is to say, if White plays normally.
However, if White plays the swashbuckling Qf3-Ne2 system, all of a sudden White's chances are much better. Indeed, 'tis not by coincedence that this has recently become white's favored way of playing the Exchange French.
Quite frankly, this entire statement is rubbish, although I'll allow ThrillerFan the pleasure/displeasure on blasting your entire claim to pieces if he wants (and as much as I agree that he overvalues the Advance a bit, your generalizing is inaccurate as well). Instead, I'll focus on the part about the Exchange Variation. First off, when has the Qf3-Ne2 system become the "favored way of playing the Exchange French"? I've played many games with the French, and not ONCE have I seen this plan before. And you say Black often has no active plans? Then what's White's plan? Give doubled pawns to Black? Whoop-de-do, that doesn't really hurt Black whatsoever. It can sometimes be a nuisance, but that's really it. Besides, Black has plenty of ideas. For example, in your line with 7...0-0 8.Bg5 where you say Black is in trouble.....I see zero reason why he's in trouble. In fact, after 8...Qb6 I would say White is the one in trouble with ideas of c5-c4, Re8, and Ne4 coming. Besides, that is only against Black playing the Nf6 and Bd6 idea. There are many other options for Black against the Exchange, my personal favorite being a system involving Nc6, Bd6, Bg4 against Nf3, and Nge7, and I'm very sure your ideas don't work against all of those, much less the "standard" Nf6-Bd6 idea. And this is just the problem against your little system.
Oh, and a piece of advice, don't try to be fancy with using words and phrases like "swashbuckling" and "Indeed, 'tis not by coincedence" in your descriptions. It makes you look stuck-up and full of yourself, which doesn't mesh well when you also make idiotic statements at the same time.
Mar 10, 2015
0
#7
TasmanianTiger wrote:
Thriller Fan,
I understand your views about the ... inferiority of the French Tarrasch. However, great players such as Garry Kasparov have played the French Tarrasch as white, and have had excellent results with this opening. Now, the French Tarrasch has some obvious cons, but also some obvious pros.
3.Nc3: You are an adamant supporter of 3.Nc3. Perhaps 3.Nc3 really is best ... I'm not experienced enough to know. But there are two major drawbacks to 3.Nc3:
(1) 3.Nc3 is very heavy in theory, because black has many options against it. For instance, there is the Classical French, with all its variations and sub-variations. Just look at the Alekhine-Chatard Attack for instance!
(2) It allows the Winawer. The Winawer is truly a deadly and dangerous weapon against 3.Nc3. It gives Black the initiative (indeed, players seem to play the French to get the initiative) and is highly complex. Bobby Fischer famously had much trouble with the Winawer, when facing it from the White side. I am by no means saying it is a bad opening, I am merely saying that White has a very hard time dealing with it.
3.e5
This is the line I used to play against the French. I stopped. Why?
(1) From the get-go, black gets the initiative, and starts undermining white's overextended (?) pawn strucuture, with 3...c5. From the beginning of the game, black will be delivering constant blows to White's pawn strucuture, and white must defend carefully.
(2) White may have a space advantage, but because black can undermine it with ...f6, I don't think it is worth too much. You will hear French players say, time and time again, that there favorite variation of the French to fight against ... is the French Advance. Indeed, when I played the French, I rejoiced when I saw the French Advance.
3.Nd2
The French Tarrasch, and my favorite.
(1) The Tarrasch immediately avoids the Winawer, due to c3. It establishes a very flexible position, when black remains cramped (in the 4...Qxd5 variation) or has open lines, but not much piece mobility (in the 4...exd5 variation). White's d2 knight has many places to go. It can go to b3, to g3 via f1, and, rarely, even to f3. The d2 knight obviously protects the f3 knight.
(2) Above were the pros, here are the cons. Nd2 blocks in the c1 bishop. It also blocks the queen's defense of the d4 pawn. But besides that, it doesn't do much.
3.exd5!?
The French Exchange, as your correctly pointed out in countless threads, is pretty much equality. That is to say, if White plays normally.
However, if White plays the swashbuckling Qf3-Ne2 system, all of a sudden White's chances are much better. Indeed, 'tis not by coincidence that this has recently become white's favored way of playing the Exchange French.
Conclusion:
The Advance Variation and 3.Nc3 both play into Black's hands insofar as you hand over the initiative. With the French Tarrasch and Qf3 Exchange, however, you are the one with the initiative. Often, it is black who has no active plans.
There are so many flaws in your logic is totally laughable:
1) Garry Kasparov, in the 80's and 90's, could pick his nose with a meat cleaver, sit in a chair loaded with cockroaches during the game, and played 1.h4, and he'd still destroy his opponents.
2) The "Kasparov Era" was before the time that 3...c5 4.exd5 exd5 5.Ngf3 Nf6 was found to be far, far, FAR superior to 5...Nc6, which was only a couple of years before the major change in assessment of the Advance in 2006/2007.
3) Your example in the Advance is terrible. The Milner-Barry Gambit (6.Bd3?!) is ADVANTAGE BLACK, and 6.b3 is just a terrible move all together. If you are going to try to counter my statement above about the advance, counter the lines I gave with what you think is so good for Black, so after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6, I could care less how great 6.Bd3 or 6.b3 or 6.Be2 or 6.Any Legal Move not named 6.a3 is for Black. 6.a3 is ADVANTAGE WHITE! The garbage analysis you gave is like trying to tell a Najdorf player that the Sicilian Defense is refuted, and the example you give is a case where you smashed the dragon!
4) In the Tarrasch, there are more cons than just the 2 you mentioned. The IQP for Black is perfectly placed on d5 against the inferior development of the Knight to d2. It even covers 2 of the most critical squares that the Knight would love to go to from d2, namely e4 and c4. There will never be pressure on d5, ever! Black gets all the piece activity he wants in the 5...Nf6! line.
5) Your Exchange lines are wrong also, and if you expect Black to be that stupid, than yes, you might get an advantage, however, after your 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 exd5 4.Bd3, Black should play 4...Bd6! Only after White has committed to 4.Nf3 should Black play 4...Nf6! If White doesn't move the g1-Knight, neither does Black move his g8-Knight! After 4.Nc3, Black should go into the Exchange Winawer with 4...Bb4! All 3 of these are 100% EQUAL!
Conclusion: After 3.Nc3, dynamic play occurs across the board. White has the better chances with the extra move, the space advantage, and typically the faster attack. After 3.e5, the key is keeping the blockade intact until White is ready to let it loose and attack the King. If Black can get in ...e5 without it costing him material or his King, Black would be better, but many ideas around 2007 have proven that White now has the upper hand here. 3.Nd2 and 3.exd5 are a complete non-issue for Black if he is satisfied with a draw, which most players as Black should be.
Mar 10, 2015
0
#8
Also don't think the given line in the 4...Qxd5 Tarrasch was accurate either.
5Ng-f3 pxp, 6.Bc4 Qd6 7Nng-f3 Nc6, probably 7...Nf6 better to prevent ne4, 8Nb3 is the standard move because don't think 8...e5 9ng5 is great for black, so usual move is again 8...Nf6 then 9Nxp etc.
In the 4...pxp line I am in the process of trying to understand, why the nf6 line is so much better than the nc6 traditional lines. Eingorn's rep book is one of the few that cover it. 3...Nf6 is probably the most common club player move. Watson popularised it, and black isn't aiming for just equality but a complicated position.
TasmanianTiger wrote:
Nothing. 3...c5 is a better move, and most often played. As a French Tarrasch player, I find 3...c5 to be by far the most annoying move. 3...a6 and 3...Be7 are a little suspicious, and I have great results against 3...Nf6. 3...c5, is definetely best.
You're very wrong that 3...c5 is most often played. In 3 databases I looked at, (chesstempo, chessbase live database, and 365chess) 3..Nf6 has on average about 500 more games than 3...c5. But I do not know why, and I'd like to say that I completely agree with the OP and TasmanianTiger and so do the engines, but I'm not a French player I'm more of a Caro-Kann guy, so Idk much about the French.
Mar 10, 2015
0
#10
TwoMove wrote:
Also don't think the given line in the 4...Qxd5 Tarrasch was accurate either.
5Ng-f3 pxp, 6.Bc4 Qd6 7Nng-f3 Nc6, probably 7...Nf6 better to prevent ne4, 8Nb3 is the standard move because don't think 8...e5 9ng5 is great for black, so usual move is again 8...Nf6 then 9Nxp etc.
In the 4...pxp line I am in the process of trying to understand, why the nf6 line is so much better than the nc6 traditional lines. Eingorn's rep book is one of the few that cover it. 3...Nf6 is probably the most common club player move. Watson popularised it, and black isn't aiming for just equality but a complicated position.
TwoMove, here's why:
And for some reason autocorrect occurred. Note to Black's ...Nxc5 should read "... no reason ...", not "... no read ..."
Also, take note of the differences in the position between Black's 9th move in the old line and Black's 10th move in the more modern treatment. White's extra move in the 10-move line is a tradeoff of his developed Bishop. Everything else is exactly the same. Black has rid himself of the Light-Square Bishop that just gets in his way anyway, and the other 3 Black minor pieces are repositioned. The Bishop is on a slightly more passive square in exchange for both knights being better placed and Black a move ahead in development as the light-squared Bishop is gone, so he can immediately develop the Rook to c8, or else move the Queen and get it to e8, still one move faster than the other line. That extra move gained may be used to activate the Bishop from e7 to d6 if White doesn't cooperate and do something dumb like trade his Bishop for Black's Knight on f6. It only makes sense that Black's score is roughly 9% better in this line than the old line. Comparing the differences in the position, all the trumps belong to Black. White still has that one trump of an endgame would favor him due to the IQP, but getting there will be by far more difficult!
Mar 10, 2015
0
#11
Database statistics can be deceptive. You can't rely on winning percentages of some random game collection. If you want to do it right, you have to look at recent high-level games. Doing this for the c5 Tarrasch shows the following:
- after 4.exd5, Qxd5 is much more popular than exd5
- after 4.exd5 exd5 5.Ngf3, Nc6 is much more popular than Nf6
- the same is true after the 4.Ngf3. Black almost never transposes into the exd5/Nf6 line
The reason why exd5/Nf6 is so unpopular can be found easily when we dig a bit deeper:
This line has been played often enough to be relevant and white scored well.
I just wanted to demonstrate that database queries, when used properly, may lead to the exact opposite result of a superficial investigation.
Mar 12, 2015
0
#12
Actually I find this type of database walking pretty superficial. See it all the time in vote chess games, where people think can solve openings never played, studied, or have any understanding of, by this method. Eingorn mentions 11...Nd6!? a comparitively rare move knight voluntarily retreating from centre, but is ready to occupy an useful post at c4, whilst at the same type hinders Nf5 12Bf4 0.0 13Re1 Re8 with a satisfactory game for black.
A big reason why less games with Nf6 than traditional Nc6, was for a long time it was thought Nf6 lost a pawn for no compensation. This was found to be not the case.
Mar 12, 2015
0
#13
So why isn't exd5/Nf6 played any more? It's naive to assume that some book author knows better than all the 2600+ guys. Also, Eingorn fails the reality check. Since 2008 (when the book was published), he played 3...a6 once and 3...c5 4.Ngf3 Nf6 5.exd5 Nxd5 twice, but never the exd5/Nf6 line. If I'd ever chose to trust this guy I'd go by his games, and not by his writing.
Mar 12, 2015
0
#14
There can be any number of reasons why a player chooses a particular line. It might be at move three/four doesn't think their is a best move, and playing a risker line to have more winning chances.
Eingorn has been a 2600 guy or equilavent in the past. In c5 line mentions a6 as a more ambitious try for black to get both minor peices to active squares. This can be tranposed to from 3...a6. Also covers the Nxd5 line, which is dependent on when white plays e4xd5 exchange. The rep book is susposed to be a "solid" one for club players. Using his GM positional judgement and software think his recommendations are very reliable, if not very ambitious.
didn't michael adams play the tarrasch in the grenke chess classic? naybe against naiditsch?
Mar 12, 2015
0
#16
Very likely he plays it all the time. It's very suited to his style of play. Karpov also played Tarrasch most of the time, when 1.e4 player. These type of players don't need much to work with, to develop something.
Mar 13, 2015
0
#18
ThrillerFan,
You keep talking about GM play and the Tarrasch, but even you with your excellent OTB rating of 2100, you are 400 points short of that standard.
At my level (my OTB FIDE rating is 1541), it is still fairly common for people being unable to play out book moves upto move 10, let alone have any idea of plans for the middlegame. Take for instance, the enjoyable game I had this week against a 1690 rated player. They played 3c5, a fairly obviously third move for a French defence player. I played 4exd5 and they played 4exd5. I played 5Nf3, whereupon they played 5Be6. Thus, they clearly had no idea how to play the c5 Tarrasch. Not only did they not know the 5Nf6 variation (which would worry me more than the 5Nc6 variation), but they did not know the 5Nc6 variation either (plus presumably the 4Qxd5 variation).
The resulting positions was more open than the Advanced or the Steinitz variations. Plus, not all e4 players at the lower levels like working with the space advantages that those openings can bring.
Mar 21, 2015
0
#19
In the other French thread, which I can't be bothered to wade through, somebody mentioned that if don't like IQP positions can play 1.e4 e6 2d4 d5 3Nd2 c5 4pxp Qxp. This leads to same pawn structure as the Rubinstein variation 3...pxp, at least in main lines. Only difference I can work out is that in 3...c5 line, black can play h6 in some lines to make it difficult for black to develop black square bishop. A pretty obscure point for most club players. Otherwise 3...pxp gives a defense against Nc3 too. Personally I have found 3Nd2 quite a problem to get winning chances against.
I am just curious to why people keep saying 3.Nd2 is terrible compared to 3.Nc3 after which they show the same 3.Nd2 line.
I would like to point out that I am not trying to come across as being pompous or superior in any way. I am just curious to know why some of the similar moves are being played by alot of people.
I personally would handle the position differently. So If you could show why my continuation is wrong compared to other people continuation.
After the following moves 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 c5 alot of people have been spending their focus on 4.exd5. However, I must admit I do not like this move at all.
Many people seem to be so excited to release the tension and give black a IQP;however, I simply do not care if black has a IQP.
Why can't I not play 4.Ngf3 for example maintaining the pressure? Why does white have to be the one to release the tension?
I believe the Closed Tarrasch highly favors white. If I am wrong under this assumption please let me know. I have used that assumption/philosophy when I have played the Tarrasch. I believe whites best approach would be to try and close the position up to unleash his attack. I believe the move 3...c5 by black is blacks atempt to blast open the position becuase they know the closed position is not so favorable for them.
I believe 4.exd5 opens the position giving them exactly what they want. Surely 4.Ngf3 is not a bad move here. Keeps the pressure. If black wants to open up the position let him waste his moves to open the position up. why should I care. I have 2 pieces developed all he has is pawn moves.
I mean just look at that position. What can he do their if he takes pawns that will just centralize my knights? I have 2 pieces developed he has none. Surely he can't be killing me in this position he has no pieces out to kill me with.
I think this position is more dangerious than people give it credit for.
For example if black plays 4...Nc6 I can than play exd5 tranposing the position back into the old mainline thriller was talking about. Same position as mentioned before. I also don't even have to play exd5 their either. I have other options. However, just showing how it can tranpose back to being more favorable.
If black plays 4...Nf6 in this position.
Surely I can just play e5.
If the knight goes back to d7 the position looks more like a Closed Tarrasch which I think favors white. Maybe blacks best try is Ne4 their. But that sure does look so Artifical.
However, these are just random lines I am suggesting. Any1 have any thoughts or see errors in my observation. I am rather curious to see what is considered the best approach for black after 4.Ngf3
What exactly is the point of black's 3....Nf6? I mean 9 out of 10 times white plays 4.e5 and black knight goes to d7
Then white is able to play the move 5.f4 and creates a lot of space. Looks like black have bit of a cramped position.
After white's 3.Nd2 what's wrong with 3...c5?
French Defense Tarrasch