Help with French Defense

That is very interesting, but I wouldn't want to face the Nimzo-Indian. (another problem....)

 I think you have some very good points [I have to say that I am not an expert however], but you failed to mention the De LaBourdonnais-McDonnell Attack. 2) f4 is a viable option for White against the French. What do you think/know of the Anti-French line using this method? I have studied [a little] Bird's Opening using f4 as a first move and have adapted it to use for a second move after 1) e4, my first choice move. Anyway, I don't really like playing against the French and don't like the Exchange Variation as White. I prefer to play creatively and try to use my tactical ability to get into a better endgame than just try to follow/memorize line for a particular opening; in any case I don't have time to do that because I work too many hours. I would appreciate any thoughts on this particular Attack [2) f4] versus the French.

P.S. I have actually posted about this subject on another post http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/the-anti-french

Black should beware Pawn-grabbing (3...dxe4) and weakening the King (4...f5). I speak as as Club player of 39 years experience and a  qualified chess coach.

2. f4 isn't bad, but generally, it'll end up with a typical French pawn setup, White with pawns on f4 & e5 and Black with pawns on e6 & d5, unless something else happens to stop that:

Play could go 1. e4 e6 2. f4 d5 (what else?! c5 maybe, but that takes us to the Sicilian Grand Prix attack) 3. e5 c4 and if he tries c3, you can play d4 and beat white to the punch. It looks awful but there are so few games in it that it may just work.

2.f4 is certainly a playable move, and White has a chance to get a great game at lower rating levels with it. After 1.e4 e6 2.f4 d5, I would probably go 3.Nc3 as White. If Black plays 3...d4 then 4.Nce2 or 3...Nf6 4.e5 leads to an equal game.

Another offbeat line for White is 2.Nf3!? when most French players are unlikely to go into an ...e6 Sicilian with 2...c5.  The most common reply is 2...d5 3.Nc3 which may throw some people off: 3...Bb4 is not a pin in this position! White could also play 3.e5 instead.

In most of these unusual lines Black will have no trouble equalizing but they aren't bad and they do get you out of the book.

I have posted about the Anti-French http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/the-anti-french before and nobody really thinks much of it although I think there's something there to study. I posted this game because someone was not convinced about the idea (of playing f4 on the second move).

This post http://www.chess.com/forum/view/game-showcase/annexing-territory was actually the first game I played using the Anti-French, also called De LaBourdonnais-McDonnell Attack. At the time, I didn't know anything about it, or that it was even considered "Anti-French".

Anyway, I also found a game where Lasker himself plays f4 on the second move although I am not sure if he was playing to beat a French Defense. Although I see him play Bd3; I played Bd3 on one of my games too much like Lasker did in his game. On this post, http://www.chess.com/forum/view/game-showcase/double-bishop-sacrifice2, I showcased a game from the great E. Lasker and one of my favorite modern player, Judit Polgar.

I hope that helps you. Take care.

I always wonder what the attraction of anti-French openings is. Why not just learn the best stuff against the French: 3. Nc3 or Nd2?

If you avoid critical positions in main-line openings, you avoid learning a lot about chess.

I would have to disagree with you on this, I think memorizing lines from the main openings you see is what keeps people from learning true chess. I know you didn't say anything about memorizing lines, but that is what happens when people try to learn the well know openings; they tend to memorize the lines and play as if they are the grandmaster that played them. Using ideas is better than memorizing from somebody else's work which may mean nothing to the individual.

Yup. Memorizing long strings of moves is a pointless waste of time. I have played tons of players over the years who only knew memorized opening sequences and who made a complete blunder once their book knowledge ran out. This means that not only did they not know that opening, they also did not know how to play chess. Learning an opening is different from memorization. It requires knowing why a certain move makes sense and what you are aiming for in the middle- or end-game. There is no fast way to accomplish this and quick fixes (avoiding someone else's favorite lines by playing an opening oddity) will only flop against someone who is a more skilled player.

Memorizing variations is a beginner mistake.  Great players study the position and analyze the variations themselves.  They don't simply memorize. They remember what they have analyzed.  They also go over their games with a fine-toothed comb and criticize every one of their own mistakes. 

Here's a good strategy for nonmasters who want to learn an opening. Study a couple of annotated games with the opening you want to learn, and then play a large number of casual games with it.  After each game, use an opening book to look up what it says about the game you just played -- because you have already played it yourself, you are likely to have a better understanding about what it says. (If you are out of the book, then you can always use a computer instead of a book.)

It's completely valid to play either the main lines or an unusual alternative -- if you're not a master then you probably won't be losing out by playing a second-best move or even an unsound gambit line.  Unusual variations are especially effective against opponents who memorize the main lines.  Main lines are most effective against opponents who don't know the opening as well. It's a matter of taste more than a right-vs.-wrong question.

My tip would be to learn the idea behind the "Anti-French" opening. It involves playing an early f4, much like a King's gambit game; so it is not really for everyone. I don't like to play against the French and I use to get beat a lot with it. Now I do ok against it and I don't mind playing against it anymore after learning the Anti-French; btw, lots of people won't call it Anti-French because they think that a French D player won't care either way what you play and that this opening doesn't really solve the question of the French D because you never can really stop someone from playing a certain defense. This opening is not about stoping the opening from being played, but to allow you early counter play and keep the game moving whereas the French D player would like to slow things down some. Good luck, wait for you to make a mistake that s/he is familiar with and take advantage of the mistake.

ps. Just do a seach on Google on the Anti-French opening, you'll find stuff on it.

I like to play 2.- Qe2 against the French Def. search for Morozevich games and you'll find it quiet interesting.The Queen move was Tschigorin's idea.

Scotch 

I'll drink to that.

You've got to beat the devil at his own game. Learn a good line against the French. Study it so you aren't unprepared or caught off guard by it or its little quirks, and then take them on till they show some respect. I recomment 3. Nc3 lines, so you'll need to know something against the Winawer (Bb4), the Classical (Nf6) and the Rubinstein/Burn stuff (dxe4)

In the process of learning about this stuff, you'll learn a lot about chess in general. Or you could just learn to play the French as Black. I play 1 e4 and the French Defense.

show me a game of an early f4 against the French your talking about please? 

In my experience White has to be very careful about a quick f4 due to some tactical tricks along the g1-a7 diagonal. I have had multiple games won due to that pin and white wasting a tempo. one of the most annoying 'anti-french' lines at a lower level is just the exchange line (look at some kasparov games) and out play you opponent in an open position that most french players arent comfortable with. if you get serious look at the Nd2 lines, and GM Nigel Short's line against the French. Both are really really really annoying once you get things sorted out.

Avoid the winawer unless your ready to book up a bunch. Black's counterplay in it easy pretty easy to follow and white is under a lot of strategical and tactical pressure especially if they grab the  g and h pawns. Its considered good for white in many lines but I feel like White is walking a razor edge, one slip and you a eunch

Another anti-French that would throw off most French players (including myself) is the Horwitz attack, where white plays b3 on move 2, then fianchettoes.

ya b3 is respectable its not the most challenging but I have seen strong masters lose to it (2300-2400)

"How to Beat the French Defence" recommends tarrasch against the french http://www.amazon.co.uk/Beat-French-Defence-Andreas-Tzermiadianos/dp/1857445678/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1337182239&sr=8-2