Looking for help against French Defence from stronger players

The only parallel between the KIA and the Exchange variation is that both seek to avoid the French main lines. Other than that, they are very different. The Exchange seems to lead to quiet and balanced positions where draw is the most likely outcome, while the KIA tends to lead to sharp and unbalanced positions with winning chances to both sides.

I am not sure why some French players seem to feel that the opponent has some kind of obligation to enter their pet lines.

Right! That is precisely what I meant to say: the thing the KIA and exchange have in common is to avoid the "real" French. In all other respects they are indeed very different.

I think the original motive for this thread was how to respond to the French as white; I think the OP should now have quite a good idea of what the possibilities are - either avoiding the French altogether - or take it up.

Estragon put this very well. I doubt that many French players think that white would have any obligation to enter any pet lines. What we are trying here is to analyze the OP's original query - and to try to do that objectively. I agree with Estragon that the exchange variation gives no problems for black (and may be even an advantage, though I am unsure of that). Mind you, this is relative to the genuine French lines (Tarrasch, Winaver, etc). The KIA, as a response here, is lame in my opinion (again agreed with Estragon), again relative to the classical French responses from white - which in my view are far stronger.

At any rate: like someone put to me recently, it does take some knowledge and a lot of study for white to enter the "real" French lines, and from that perspective it may well be easier to avoid it altogether.

Of course if black is playing lazily then white can take the advantage, but vice versa! And I do have decent experience in the exchange, simply because although it's not the most popular line I face, it's still decently popular.

I like those kinds of positions. White is committed to Nc3 (which really he often tries to avoid unless he plays c4 first. Of course, I'm talking about comparing this opening to the regular exchange) while black is to ...Bb4. It can lead to an interesting, almost nimzo like position where black is fighting for control of the light squares (with no space problems) while white often gets the two bishops in an open position.

 To dismiss the KIA as lame just doesn't hold water when you go through any database and find that just about every grandmaster in history has used it at some time or other. Having said that, this discussion has made me question why I chose the KIA as my weapon against the French, and I suppose to be truthful, I got lazy, pure and simple. I'm now studying 3 Nc3 lines and thoroughly enjoying it - but I'm still using the KIA until I feel confident enough to play 3 Nc3 in anger. By accident, I may have stumbled across the way to go with the French - learn the quick and easy KIA as a good short term fix, buying you time to study more effective (but more complicated) lines. 

From my own OTB experience, I can say that the French never gave me much concern. Btw, of the people that I know that play the French, none of them play anything else. It's almost like being a bad relationship, you want to leave and find someone better but you just can't take that step.

My main choice is the Tarrasch, and that's because of a few Karpov games that really seemed to put Black in a corner, never letting him achieve anything.

I have a few pet lines in the Tarrasch, one of which I used constantly to beat an older member of my chess club.

I find the comment by bambette very good and informative. To say the KIA is lame against the French was probably an exagguration on my part - but I still think that 3. Nc3 and 3. Nd2 are - at least theoretically - much stronger for white, and therefore a reason to study them.

I sure have a consensus with both Estragon and Fiveofswords & I hope the OP has gotten a comprehensive answer to his query

At the risk of being repetitive, in my view the key options for white after 1. e4, e6; 2. d4, d5, are:

3. Nc3,  the main line that may lead to a Winaver line after 3...Bb4

3. exd, the exchange variation that avoids "French", is solid, but causes no problems for black

3. e5, the advance variation; considered weaker by Concipe (see his analysis)

3. Nd2, the Tarrasch variation

The KIA (King's Indian attack) follows from

1. e4, e6; 2. d3

and thus requires an earlier departure by White from the classical French

My favourite 3 Nc3 game so far... Torber-Menke Corr. 1950.

1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 Nc3 Bb4 4 a3 Bc3 5 bc3 Nf6 6 e5 Nfd7 7 a4 c5  8 Qg4 Kf8 9 h4 Qc7 10 Rh3 cd4 11 Ba3 Kg8  12 Qg7 !!!!!! Kg7 13 Rg3 Kh6 14 Bc1 Kh5 15 Be2 Kh4 16 Rh3 Thank you and goodnight.  

Thank you Rainbow- how do you do that? I'm new to this site, and I hope to contribute as much as I can - if people want my tuppenceworth that is.

No, actually there is a lot of theory on 4 a3. It's not the favorite move, but it's actually quite respectable (there has been a lot of analysis in the position you posted), plus it's hard to play against as black, if he isn't prepared for the move (fortunately, otherwise black's position is indeed pretty good, though he probably doesn't have more than equality in an unbalanced position.).

In fact, it's really funny you say 4 e5 is forced, which supports my opinion that most people don't know that white has tons of alternatives on move 4, none of them are particularly straightforward to meet. Among 4 a3, alternatives are Ne2, Qd3, Bd2, Qg4, exd5, and Bd3.

If you want tactics in the french look at this line.

cxd4 is not such a good move.  Up until that move the game was about equal with chances for both sides.

O-O was a terrible blunder that loses the game outright. 

This is my favorite line when playing the French Defense.