Is the French Defense good for black?

1.e4 2.d3 just fails imo. Its wayyy to passive-You block in your light sq bishop and your chances for a slight opening advantage blow up instantly after that move. Play an opening like the KG, Italian, or Ruy Lopez which are far better.

And about 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6. Yes, its a French but 2.e4 here just drops a pawn. The 2.e4 here is known as the Blackmar-Diemar Gambit but that opening fails too. Simply 2...dxe4 and black is at least slightly better with proper play assuming he knows the lines.

The idea behind being white is to play for a win most of the time. Openings like 1.e4 w/2.d3 fail to do this. Even if you are going for a draw, play the exchange variation against the French-certainly better than 1.e4 2.d3 . Playing 1.e4 2.d3 or 'system openings' like the KIA in general isn't good in the long term for your chess.

One of the reasons I dropped e4 was the french.

Dzindzi says that the French Defence sucks , why further discussions? . AFAIK this defence had never been in Kasparov's and Fischer's repertoire isn't it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyIM2h1nGaA&feature=plcp

In the second diagram, why not the simple 2...dxe5? You simply win a pawn. No need to go defensive when you can go offensive (and win material by doing so).

Daelvis's Nc6 is suboptimal, but it certainly doesn't lose immediately- it is typically seen against the tarrasch french (3. Nd2) to develop with tempo on white's unprotected d pawn. however white normally wants to play c3 anyway, so this isn't an inconvenience really. black usually plays an early f6 in these lines. black's blocked c pawn can be really cramping though, so there's really no reason not to play c5 as early as possible (as it's kind of the whole point of the french- similar to the alekhine in some sense, as you tempt white's center forward so you can attack and undermine it later)

The french defense is good. You can have it as your only opening for the rest of your life aiming for the GM title.

But top players mostly do not play the french.

Why ?

I suppose they reason like this : " Why give my oponent ANY kind of advantage ? When you play the french ...you volontarily chose to "play in a box" . You often get passive positions ...which you of course CAN fight from.

So...why give your oponent such an "advantage" for free ? Therefore I suppose top players play 1...e5 or 1...c5 . In this way they deny white this "advantage".

BUT this is on top level of course. On club level or maybe up to 2300 Elo or even higher the french should work fine. But lets say a 2500 GM player playing the french vs a super GM will be EXTREMELY challenging for black.

But if a 2500 GM  plays 1...e5 vs a super GM his chances should be better to equalize the game.

The opening is good for surprise value.  the reason gms do not use it regularly because black gets a passive middlegame.

Also i would not trust a chess opening having anything  to do with France.  chess is a military game.  looking back at history, the French military was really passive

• Im World war one, France was conquered by their neighbor Germany.   did they learn their lesson?
•  of course not.  a couple years later France was conquered again in world war two.  who took them over?  not other then the same country Germany.

Here is an oxymoron: French Army

The french defense has served me well for decades .  When white plays 1 e4 the french is one of the top 4 responses along with 1... e5 , sicilian(s) and the caro kann . 

"I may be forced to admit that the French is sound but I doubt it. It is anti-positional and weakens the Kingside" R J Fischer

But Bobby, White's positional advantages cost him time. Besides, did you not, throughout your career, struggle more against the French than other Black defences? 

And didn't Kovakevic absolutely destroy you in a French Winawer at Rovinj/Zagreb 1970?  Isn't there an element of sour grapes in your grudging respect for e6?

your response does not help answer the OP's question

I often find harmless humor beneficial & functional (often clever) in disrupting or redirecting a heated thread (or discussion) away from dispute, back toward constructive engagement. But greenibex, ...it may still be too soon on the 0-2 French/German thing . 

The French Defense has withheld the test of time for a reason. It is quite solid & packed with resources. Personally, I've found many studied French aficionados pretty darn pleased & eager to play against the Advanced, ...also for good reason . They understand the underlying middle-game structures (and ensuing endgame setups) and often effortlessly convert, ...further, uncannily tough defending these familiar positions against stronger opponents. Lively discussion!

Thanks.   i know i do   good job like this at times

Daelvis- I think you should join the club-French Defense Fanatics

French food is good.  French defense is.bad inmho

I've only played the french once, and that was because of a mouse slip .  It's a good opening for black, it's just not my cup of tea.

If you want to play the French, you could think about becoming a specialist (you know like Sylvester Stallone in that film with Sharon Stone). A specialist is very hard to beat.

Korchnoi comes to mind and Nigel Short has been kicking butt with the French for some time now.

It is the original antidote to the fools mate.

I tried it a few times and got on ok with it, but I am a Sicilian specialist, so I play like the Godfather.