French Vs Sicilian

I am going to lose the french 😭

Rip

@AustinL0926 - Obviously you're more of a student of the Sicilian than I am, but I'm coming from the Nimzowitsch school of positional play, which suggests otherwise.

 - Ng4 only seems like trouble if white intends to castle kingside, which he doesn't.

- 12. ..e6 is what I would want to provoke from the 10. Nxc6 line.  White is going to attack with the g- and h-pawns, from the front, and e6 closes off the light square bishop from helping to impede the coming pawn storm.

- It doesn't look like black has enough compensation for the exchange after 15. Bxf8 Qxf8.  Yes, the bishop pair is strong, but the queen is deactivated and the long diagonal is at least temporarily blocked for the dark square bishop.  Yes, black gets good attacking chances, the likes of which most amateurs will probably crack under, but I have to think white should win with a precise defense.  I'll go over it later, because it does look very interesting now that you point out this intention on the part of black.

Hmm

I vote we should have a Sicilian V Caro

It's scheduled after the French v Bongcloud.

@AustinL0926 - I think your analysis is reasonable, but as you've noted the situations we're arguing here are unclear.  When you talk about "small but enduring edge" the difference in analysis between classical and hypermodern often tips the scale in opposite directions.

For example, in the first situation, I would have no issue giving up the e3 bishop, the black knight will have moved three times while the bishop has moved only once.  After 8. Bb5+ Nd7 9. O-O Nxe3 10. Qxe3 white will then play Nce2 and c3, which buttons up his position nicely.  I agree with you that the g7 bishop is strong here, but white still has lots of pawns to put on dark squares, as well as two knights for exchanging possibilities, so it's a manageable issue as far as I can see.  Your viewpoint on the matter is not unreasonable, it's merely a question of how we weigh particular elements.  As you put it, the bishop pair is worth the loss of tempo, whereas I feel the tempo is more valuable.

Bear in mind, Nimzowitsch places less value on the bishop pair than classical analysis does.  In other words, the engine will always favor the classical approach.  Which approach is more correct (odds are they both have their limits) is an open question, and probably is situation-dependent (like the bishop pair, which is deadly in certain situations, but quite weak in others, such as minor piece endgames).

The Sicilian Defense itself has both hypermodern and classical elements to it for black, which I think it why the line analysis has tipped back and forth so much.  Most defenses lean heavily towards one or the other, but the Sicilian does both in roughly equal proportion - it seeks a central pawn majority (classical), while attacking the center from the flank (hypermodern).  It's the fact that the analysis is somewhat unclear which makes the Sicilian so much fun to play/play against.  Even with all the theory that's out there, there are still deep questions to be answered.

But it's really a matter of preference here I doubt my "f3" can every be called inaccurate

Hmm

when you go against a 500 rated player who was told that the french = op:

When you're rated 1500 points higher than your opponent, it doesn't matter what they've been told! And most people don't post wins over people they out rate by over 1000 points

If I play a 10 game match with Carlsen, and he plays the Sicilian and I play the French, Carlsen will win 10 - 0

If I play the Sicilian and he plays the French, Carlsen will win 10 - 0

I'm not sure what that proves about the openings

... I played someone who was well over my rating and I won

I am playing an opponent 200 points above me

Think I am losing in our french game 

SERIOUSLY???

It’s hard to tell for that one very tough position

MY KING IS IN THE OPEN AND POSITION IS TOUGH??? I LOST MY RIGHT TO CASTLE ALSO

This is the very reason I'm in these challenges!  It's what players around our level need most to improve our mastery of the opening - deep analysis from both players who use the opening, as well as those who don't.

Those who use a particular opening to good effect almost always understand the basic premise of it, but often fail to see the drawbacks (and every opening has at least some drawbacks).  @AustinL0926 has a great understanding of the Dragon and the kinds of tactical ideas which spring from it.  An outsider's perspective can identify weaknesses you don't consider.