French exchange:why does everyone play this?!

Ummm, the Armenian...

Is there something new against white's continuation in Volokitin-Vaganian? If not, then the position does not appeal to me.

Absolutely the contrary. Main line Winawer is basically a tactical mess, where white has a pawn more and great control on the dark squares, but many times he cannot move his knight from e2 (where it obstructs the f1 bishop) until move twenty-five, or so.

The exchange French is symmetrical dullness, excluding 4.c4, which is more active, but transposes to an IQP position which is quite easy for Black to handle.

Given the database results: you should be happy if they play the exchange. All the problems and complications from the Tarrasch or Classical are gone instantly! And, since people are generally trying to avoid studying what to do against the French, they probably have no idea how to play that any better than any other line.

No sooner than I had read this thread,I jumped online to play a quick blitz game. I had the white pieces,and opened up with e4,and my opponent played ...e6. What are the odds? since I had the french exchange on my mind, I went for it! here's the game!

Actually the opening on # 30 is Queen's gambit accepted ( the normal move order is 1.d4 d5 2.c4 dc4 3.e3 e5 4.Bxc4 ed4 5.ed4). Via the French move order, Black has o be cooperative to take on c4 that early. Other than that, the whole Nge2/f4 idea is simply very bad, but Black obviously had a day off (ot two).

Huh. I guess I should play more often then; the French Advance happens to be a personal favorite as Black.

Nonsensical engine logic, probably from the same sources that claim 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.Qe2 Qe7 6.d3 Nf6 7.Nc3 is an advantage for white.

Noone sane enough will take these things seriously.

hmmm....anyone know any good books on the theory of the French? (Winawer,Tarrasch,Classical,Advance etc)

it's time for me to delve into a bit of theory after scratching on the surface of this great opening for so long

A lot of French players dislike the exchange variation because it takes them out of their deepest preparation.  The solution: play the French against someone who can out book you.  You'll develop a new appreciation for the exchange variation.

Moskalenko, Vitiugov, Psakhis, Williams, Watson, McDonald, Eingorn... the choice is ample.

Paul Morphy played it.  William Lombardy recommended it for club players stating that there is no such thing as a drawing variation below the level of master.  It can be played for psychological effect, giving Black a false sense of security. 

Define "security" please.

Black has almost equalized as early as move three, but this does not mean he can play nonsense. If he does, he will lose, of course.

IM pfren wrote: "I will just mention that one of the nicest Capa victories starts like 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Nc3 (oh yes!) Nf6 5.d3 d6 6.Bg5 (violating the well-known Lasker aphorism) which of course results in a flat, boring position.

Final result? A fine positional victory for white, playing the definition of simple chess.

If THAT opening is "good", then I fail to spot why the Colle isn't." 

Equality means nothing until the scoresheets are signed

I am not sure I can define security without engaging in circular definitions.  What I mean is that many Black players having equalized feel that they can't lose.  The position is open and development and initiative is all important. If Black doesn't actively  fight he can lose.  The other point is that some Black players convince themselves that White is only playing for a draw because he played the exchange variation, and relax their guard.

ah ok....thanks for that.was just looking into the Watson book...it has good reviews....I'lll look into those other ones too

I managed to get an interesting game from the exchange a while ago

I mainly like the books by Moskalenko (they are two, both very good) and Eingorn (which is sort-of-complete repertoire book, based on 1...e6). Psahkis is a (slightly outdated) encyclopedia of the French, and Watson... errr, Watson- pretty knowledgeable about the opening, but hardly subjective. And frustratingly flawed analyses (what sort of computer does he use?). Vitiugov's book shows that the author knows his stuff very well, but the book itself is a footwork.

I dont have Moskalenko's book on the Winawer but its at the top of my "to get " list .  Is it as good as his Flexible French ? 

Yes, IMO it's equally good. Moskalenko's books are love'em or hate'em, the man is very expressive and he shows his contempt about computer-generated analysis whenever applicable- but the content is entertaining, educative and authoritative. Viktor is an excellent writer.

Chess isn't just about mating your opponent's king... you also have to mindscrew him. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDoU8hWGVS4

Superchess GURU on YouTube Shows a way to make the French Exchange Variation more exciting.  He made his own system, and I've played it.  It works out really well, and he has had great results with it.  He has won every game so far with it.