Forums

How do I counter 1.e4 e6

Sort:
BUYDE

When I get e4 I don't know what to do if he/she plays e6.

opening recommendations to counter e6

Thanks

WillThisWolfBlunder

d4?

Andrei-Cristian2009

The most simplest idea is e4 e6 d4 d5 exd5 exd5 and then the position is very simple(btw, if he doesn't play d5, you got a powerful center, it is pretty simple too).

Solmyr1234

Levi says Wing Gambit (also against Sicilian):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMBF4FGzDD4&t=5s

He thinks that in practical terms, you have an easy game / win.

I wonder what Simon says. he's not Much into gambits though.

tygxc

Most testing is 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 Nc3: develop pieces and play for the center.

najdorf96

indeed. For variety, you could study 1. e4 e6 2. c4[!?] (in Blitz or Daily) 2. ... d5 3. cd5 ed5 4. ed5 Nf6 5. Bb5+ Nbd7 6. Nc3 Be7 7. Qf3 with an unclear position for both sides. Otherwise, I would recommend the French Tarrasch. IF you like Mainline stuff, study Every Line (and footnotes) and Practice diligently Everything after 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3.

EKAFC
Andrei-Cristian2009 wrote:

The most simplest idea is e4 e6 d4 d5 exd5 exd5 and then the position is very simple(btw, if he doesn't play d5, you got a powerful center, it is pretty simple too).

This is what you play when you like Boring positions.

 

I highly recommend you try to learn the Classical Variation with Nc3. As a French player, no one plays this at your level. Many French players don't study this because they never face it. Use lichess opening explorer. They will show you the most played moves at every rating level and play a few causal games or play against a computer just to get a foundation. Analyze with a computer and create a lichess study on the different variations

AadarshIyengar

Try the reti gambit. It looks pretty fun.

The two knights French is also something if you want to avoid theory.

If you want to learn something that is more mainline, I would try either the Tarrasch or the Classical. No one really plays this at our level so you should have an advantage. 



jmpchess12
EKAFC wrote:
Andrei-Cristian2009 wrote:

The most simplest idea is e4 e6 d4 d5 exd5 exd5 and then the position is very simple(btw, if he doesn't play d5, you got a powerful center, it is pretty simple too).

This is what you play when you like Boring positions.

 

I highly recommend you try to learn the Classical Variation with Nc3. As a French player, no one plays this at your level. Many French players don't study this because they never face it. Use lichess opening explorer. They will show you the most played moves at every rating level and play a few causal games or play against a computer just to get a foundation. Analyze with a computer and create a lichess study on the different variations

 

While 3.Nc3 is considered the best move the logic here is very wrong. I exclusively play 1.e6 against 1.e4. Looking at my opening tree since I started playing on chess.com I have 173 games in the advanced, 101 games in the exchange, 62 games in the Classical and 25 games in the Tarrasch. This is over a 5 month period and roughly 400 point range (1500-1900) although I spent most of my time in the 1700s during that time period. 

Also French players very much do study 3.Nc3, probably more than anything else since it is where the most critical lines at the master level are played. 

3.Nc3 is considered the strongest reply to the French, but it comes with a lot of complications and a mountain of theory as black can respond in multiple ways with 3.Bb4 (Winawer) 3. Nf6 (Classical) and 3. dxe4 (Rubinstein). By contrast 3.e5 is almost as challenging with a much more compact set of ideas, and 3. exd5 is a less ambitious move that may have a psychological advantage especially at the intermediate level as many French players dislike the exchange. 3.Nd2 is also a well respected variation, but at least to me doesn't stand out in any way as something to recommend.

BlackKaweah
I have had good luck with the advanced variation 3. e5. The pawn is very cramping.
MyNameIsNotBuddy

I play the French as black, and the most trying variation to play against (I think) is the Tarrasch Variation. However, the Tarrasch would probably not be recommended to someone who isn't at least an expert. I personally play the Advanced French, it is considered to be one of the most testing variations of the French. 

Here are the variations for reference:

Tarrasch:

 

Advanced:

diagram-placeholder.png

 

 

MyNameIsNotBuddy

I don't think the Advanced is working, it's 3. e5

EKAFC
jmpchess12 wrote:
EKAFC wrote:
Andrei-Cristian2009 wrote:
 

 

 

While 3.Nc3 is considered the best move the logic here is very wrong. I exclusively play 1.e6 against 1.e4. Looking at my opening tree since I started playing on chess.com I have 173 games in the advanced, 101 games in the exchange, 62 games in the Classical and 25 games in the Tarrasch. This is over a 5 month period and roughly 400 point range (1500-1900) although I spent most of my time in the 1700s during that time period. 

Also French players very much do study 3.Nc3, probably more than anything else since it is where the most critical lines at the master level are played. 

3.Nc3 is considered the strongest reply to the French, but it comes with a lot of complications and a mountain of theory as black can respond in multiple ways with 3.Bb4 (Winawer) 3. Nf6 (Classical) and 3. dxe4 (Rubinstein). By contrast 3.e5 is almost as challenging with a much more compact set of ideas, and 3. exd5 is a less ambitious move that may have a psychological advantage especially at the intermediate level as many French players dislike the exchange. 3.Nd2 is also a well respected variation, but at least to me doesn't stand out in any way as something to recommend.

If you are a beginner to 1500 blitz, what I said is true. Not so much at your level

ConfusedGhoul

MyNameIsNotBuddy I'm very glad to hear a French player thinks the Tarrasch is very testing! (it's my pet line) many people regard it as passive or non-threatening but the basic idea is that White is not going to checkmate Black, he is going to build a fantastic center with the idea of supporting it with c3 or more rarely with f4 and leave Black withour any counterplay. As for the blocked c1-bishop, well it's a closed position so it doesn't really matter and it could very well come to life after Nb3 or Nf1 while the Bishop will most likely be a tall pawn for most of the game!

ThrillerFan
jmpchess12 wrote:
EKAFC wrote:
Andrei-Cristian2009 wrote:

The most simplest idea is e4 e6 d4 d5 exd5 exd5 and then the position is very simple(btw, if he doesn't play d5, you got a powerful center, it is pretty simple too).

This is what you play when you like Boring positions.

 

I highly recommend you try to learn the Classical Variation with Nc3. As a French player, no one plays this at your level. Many French players don't study this because they never face it. Use lichess opening explorer. They will show you the most played moves at every rating level and play a few causal games or play against a computer just to get a foundation. Analyze with a computer and create a lichess study on the different variations

 

While 3.Nc3 is considered the best move the logic here is very wrong. I exclusively play 1.e6 against 1.e4. Looking at my opening tree since I started playing on chess.com I have 173 games in the advanced, 101 games in the exchange, 62 games in the Classical and 25 games in the Tarrasch. This is over a 5 month period and roughly 400 point range (1500-1900) although I spent most of my time in the 1700s during that time period. 

Also French players very much do study 3.Nc3, probably more than anything else since it is where the most critical lines at the master level are played. 

3.Nc3 is considered the strongest reply to the French, but it comes with a lot of complications and a mountain of theory as black can respond in multiple ways with 3.Bb4 (Winawer) 3. Nf6 (Classical) and 3. dxe4 (Rubinstein). By contrast 3.e5 is almost as challenging with a much more compact set of ideas, and 3. exd5 is a less ambitious move that may have a psychological advantage especially at the intermediate level as many French players dislike the exchange. 3.Nd2 is also a well respected variation, but at least to me doesn't stand out in any way as something to recommend.

 

The Exchange has no psychological advantage for White.  Myself, an amateur, played in the Washington Chess Congress last weekend (U2200 Section).  Three of my 7 games were Frenches:

 

Round 1 - White - Steinitz Variation - 1-0

Round 2 - Black - Exchange Variation - 0-1

Round 4 - Black - Exchange McCutchen* - 0-1

 

* The Exchange McCutchen arose via 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Bg5 e6 4.e4 Bb4 5.exd5 Qxd5 (5...exd5? 6.Qf3 advantage White!  This is the only case where ...Qxd5 must be played - it is an option in the open Tarrasch - 3...c5 4.exd5 Qxd5), and in all other cases, the pawn should recapture.

 

As a French player for over 25 years, let me give you a hint.  French players are not annoyed by the Exchange variation!  The few that are usually quit playing the French very quickly!  Otherwise, the Exchange is the easiest line in the world to defend.  White gets nothing!  Nada!  Zilch!  Since 2014, when I adopted the line of the Exchange that I play today, I have faced the pure Exchange French (Not the Open Tarrasch or Exchange McCutchen) roughly 50 times in over the board play.  I have lost once in severe time trouble in a G/30 event from a winning position, and so it was the clock, nit the position out of the opening that killed me.  Sure, roughly 15 to 20 of those 50ish games were draws, but no wins for White outside the one fast time control game.

 

The Exchange CANNOT be recommended for "psychological" reasons.  French players foam at the mouth in joy when White does something as stupid as 3.exd5??.  Half the point is already ours, and we'll fight you for the other half!

0peoplelikethis

ThrillerFan, you play against low elo amateurs most of the tume.Your otb statistics are totally irrelevant: http://chessstream.com/profile/patrick-mccartney-466 Your classical fide has dropped down to 1804. No offense, but you need a reality check.

MyNameIsNotBuddy
ConfusedGhoul wrote:

MyNameIsNotBuddy I'm very glad to hear a French player thinks the Tarrasch is very testing! (it's my pet line) many people regard it as passive or non-threatening but the basic idea is that White is not going to checkmate Black, he is going to build a fantastic center with the idea of supporting it with c3 or more rarely with f4 and leave Black withour any counterplay. As for the blocked c1-bishop, well it's a closed position so it doesn't really matter and it could very well come to life after Nb3 or Nf1 while the Bishop will most likely be a tall pawn for most of the game!

Neat

ThrillerFan
0peoplelikethis wrote:

ThrillerFan, you play against low elo amateurs most of the tume.Your otb statistics are totally irrelevant: http://chessstream.com/profile/patrick-mccartney-466 Your classical fide has dropped down to 1804. No offense, but you need a reality check.

 

Here you go smarta$$:

C00: French defence - 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 - Chess Opening explorer (365chess.com)

 

 

White scores 46 45% across over 23,000 games.

 

Also, that FIDE rating isn't very accurate because only about 10% of the games I actually play count towards that.  If the United States would learn to rate all games played via FIDE, that rating would be more accurate.

 

Because they only have about 10% of their events FIDE rated, the FIDE ratings in the US are deflated.  A study has been done and the two rating systems are 50 to 100 points apart in actual strength.  Meaning a 2000 FIDE is about the same as a 2050 USCF.  When you get US players, especially kids, that play in 1 FIDE event a year and 100 games all told, their FIDE sits at 1600 whereas their actual strength is more like 2000 FIDE and 2100 USCF.

So now you face this kids with USCF 2100 and FIDE 1630 (This is actually VERY common), and you get a draw against them, your 2000 USCF rating goes up and your FIDE 1820 (deflated from many other games like this) goes down!

 

If every game in this country were FIDE rated, this problem would not occur.  Kids would quickly be 2100 FIDE and 2200 USCF, and us older 2000 USCF players would maintain our 1950 FIDE ratings, which on the FIDE scale, is right around where my strength actually is, not 1800.

 

So before you start spewing BS thinking that you are such a smarta$$ and hot head, get your facts straight.  I live here in the US - I have a better idea of the flaws in the way tournaments are ran here!

AlbAmchess

I like the monte-carlo variation: I don’t actually play e4 but if I ever played against the French I would play e4 e6 d4 d5 exd5 exd5 c4 which is basically a queen’s gambit with both e-pawns removed.

MyNameIsNotBuddy
AlbAmchess wrote:

I like the monte-carlo variation: I don’t actually play e4 but if I ever played against the French I would play e4 e6 d4 d5 exd5 exd5 c4 which is basically a queen’s gambit with both e-pawns removed.

I used to play that, but 4...Qe7+ makes it annoying to play.