Need video-course recommendations on the French defense

Is 6..Nge7 not playable anymore? As I understand it white has two main replies to it. 7. 0-0 and 7. Na3. Against both moves Blacks main plan is to put the knight on f5, play Qb6, Na5, and Bb5 to trade off the light square bishop. When g4 is played the knight retreats to e7 and soon black will try a pawn sac h5 to try to get the f5 square back for his knight. If white castles then black will castle long and try to attack whites castled position. I do think Qb6 is probably the better move theoretically but I kind of like the complications in the Bd7 line.

It is not Qb6 and f6, it is either or.

For a while the hype train favored 5...Bd7 and 6...f6, but White just ignored it and castles.

6...Nge7 can be played first, but what then after 7...Nf5? (7...Ng6, going for e5, is dubious and White should answer with storming the h-pawn).

Black has to go at White's center somehow.  If you are not going to play f6 or Qb6, what are you doing?  Sacrifice a knight?

6...Nge7 is the main move, and while I think you're going to have to work very hard to achieve equality everywhere (such is life in the French; I should know as a practitioner lol) it's okay to play for black for sure

Well, again, I already showed you the problem with 6...Nge7 if Black follows up with ...cxd4 before playing ...Nf5 (and ...Qb6, etc.)

Let's say you try to play 6...Nge7 and the immediate 7...Nf5?  This is after 7.O-O, which is stronger than 7.Na3.

Now the problem for Black is 8.dxc5!  Now 8...Bxc5 9.Bd3 Nfe7 10.Nbd2 Ng6 11.Nb3 Bb6 12.Re1 Qb8 13.Qe2 Bc7 14.Bxg6 hxg6 15.Rh5 Nc5 is a clear advantage for White.

9...Nh4 is no improvement.  10.Nbd2 O-O 11.b4 Nxf3+ 12.Nxf3 Be7 13.Qc2 h6 14.b5 Na5 15.Qa4 f5 16.exf6 Rxf6 17.Ne5 b6 18.Be3 with once again a clear advantage for White.

So again in summary, after 5...Bd7?! 6.Be2:

6...cxd4 and 7...Ng8-e7-f5 or 7...Ng8-h6-f5 is too slow

6...Nge7-g6 leads to problems as White advances the h-pawn

6...Nge7-f5 gives White the strong 8.dxc5!

You are better off learning the 5...Qb6 line.  It is far stronger than 5...Bd7.  When I'm White, I am actually EXTREMELY HAPPY when Black plays an early ...Bd7.

I think black could do better than 10...0-0 how about Something like 10...Ng6 11. Nb3 Bb6 12. Re1 Bc7 13. Bxg6 hxg6 14, Nc5 Rh5 where if 15. Nxb7 black has 15...Qb8 winning the e pawn. White probably has a better move than taking on b7...like Maybe 15. Bf4 but maybe the position would be complicated enough for black to have chances? Well...at least black would have an h file to work with....something he wouldnt have with 10..0-0.

I fail to see the advantages of ...Qb6 over ...Bd7. The Bd7 is always well placed there, while in some lines the Qb6 is  obstructing Black's natural plans.

A rather fresh Black idea, which does make sense to me. I will give a rough sketch, as there are several options for both sides. Langrock's 2nd edition of his Rubinstein book gives more details and full cover of the line:

Thank you @pfren. It can be quite impractical to get bogged down in long lines of theory and 5...a6 definitely looks interesting with a clear idea in mind.

In fact, this seems analogous to another recommendation you gave in another post I read a while ago where you recommended to meet the London in a simple manner by means of ...e6 and ...Bd6 and possibly ...b6 followed by ...Bc8-a6. In other words, the same idea of exchanging the bad bishop. That system against the London is very pragmatic and it has served me extremely well in OTB chess. I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for that one!

The problem is not the Bishop move itself.  It's not like the Bishop is bad on d7.

The problem is the timing of the attack on d4.  It's all got to do with White's King safety.

5...Bd7 gives White the ability to tuck his King away to safety AND maintain the firm grip on the center.

5...Qb6 puts immediate pressure on White's center, and if White tries to tuck the King away by Castling, his center falls apart as there is no good way to hold it together, and if White plays the strongest moves against the 5...Qb6 and 6...Nh6 line, his King is still stuck in the center after 12 moves, his Bishop hasn't even been developed yet, so he is multiple moves away from castling, and by then, the Bishop had developed itself to d7 (e.g. 9...Bd7 or a move or two later in the case of the 9...Be7 line, again, my personal preference is 9...Bd7, but there is nothing wrong with 9...Be7 and waiting another move or two).

It also avoids the Kupreichik.  Not saying the Kupreichik is a refutation to Black by any means.  It is simply one less thing to worry about.

But when you say you fail to see the difference and are comparing the Black Bishop to the Black Queen itself, that's not the point.  The point is White's d4-pawn (or technically what is currently White's c3-pawn because that's the pawn that will end up on d4 after the pawn trade) and White's King.

Some books, like "Grandmaster Preparation: Calculation" talk about the concept of move order, like you know you want to play Rad8 and Bb4, but it might actually make a difference which one you do first!  Rad8 and Bb4 draw, but Bb4 and Rad8 wins.  Similar concept here.  It's not the debate of whether to play Bd7 or whether to play Qb6, it's a question of WHEN to play Bd7 and WHEN to play Qb6.

The way to cause White problems (I play the Advance French from both sides) is to play the Queen move first, and play the Bishop move later.

You may be able to "survive" in both cases.  Not saying 5...Bd7 is "refuted", but if I can get a dynamically balanced position with more potential for White to go wrong and more room for White to error, and White lacks a safe King, compared to the lack of pressure on White where White can have a lasting "+/=" type of advantage and a safe King, I can't see how anybody can argue in favor of the latter.  5...Qb6 is like staying at the Hilton and 5...Bd7 is like staying at the Days Inn.  Sure, it's not that hourly hotel with drugs and prostitution, but I'm not happy with the Days Inn when I'm playing the French.  I expect more!

Here are some recommendations of a few authors. The score appears to be somewhat even:

Yannick Peletier - 4...Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.a3 c4

Damian Lemos - 4...Qb6 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.a3 c4

Nicholas Pert - 4...Nc6 5.Nf3 Bd7

Fabian Libiszewski - 4...Nc6 5.Nf3 Bd7 6.a3 c4.

Brian Tillis/Lenderman - 4...Ne7

4...Ne7 is interesting.  I can't argue for or against it.  It does prepare for the attack on d4, which is the important thing.

Libiszewski should never get that line.  Against 5...Bd7, 6.Be2 is far superior to 6.a3.  Again, like 5...Bd7, is 6.a3 "playable", as in "not totally refuted"?  Sure!  But again, 6.Be2 is the Hilton and 6.a3 is the Days Inn against 5.Bd7?!

Pert?  Enjoy defending that position for a draw.

Peletier/Lemos - Never said there is anything wrong with the 6...c4 line.  It's a different game all together.  I play it occasionally, but have a preference for the more active 6...Nh6.  If anybody ever finds something wrong with 6...Nh6, then I can always fall back on 6...c4.  That's not a "One is better than the other" argument.  That's merely personal preference.

6...Nh6 is the Hilton and 6...c4 is the Omni.  Both are far better than the Days Inn!

@ThrillerFan, what ways would you consider meeting the Classical variation?

Why isn't 6.Na3 mentionned ? Authors seem to be only focusing on 6.a3 and 6.Be2 (after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6).

5...Bd7 is a perfectly good move. 
It makes no sense to compare it to 5....Qb6.
These are the two main big moves in the French advance for Black.
It is just a question of taste.

You talking White or Black?

As White, I avoid it.  I play the Steinitz.

As Black, while rare that I play it (much more of an advocate of either the Winawer, McCutchen (or black side of the Steinitz if 4.e5), or Rubinstein, but the few rare times that I do play the Classical, I typically play the more modern 7...a6 over 7...O-O.  Not saying there is anything wrong with 7...O-O (unlike my claim that there really is something wrong with 5...Bd7 in the advance), but 7...a6 is simply a preference for me.

Against the Alekhine-Chatard Attack, I have always answered with 6...c5.  In Over the Board tournament play, I've got a perfect record against it, but it's merely 4-0 or 5-0 (not sure which) over the course of 23 years.

I am talking as black.

My understanding is that the classical is 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3. Here there are a number of different options. My inclination would also be to play the Steinitz as I have a bad impression of Winawer as black and I like the thematic nature of the Steinitz.

What is the idea after 6...c5 7.Bxe7 Qxe7 8.Nb5?

Please feel free to show any of your games in this line.

Might it be better to play 6...h6 before ...c5?

There is no idea. Probably GingerGM was sleepy.

7.Bxe7 Kxe7 is the book move- since ages.

The Classical Variation is specifically 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7

4...Bb4 is the McCutchen

4...dxe4 is the Burn

4.e5 is the Steinitz

3...Bb4 is the Winawer

3...dxe4 is the Rubinstein

And as Pfren already mentioned, in the Alekhine-Chatard attack, Black takes back on move 7 with the King, not the Queen.

@pfren I did not consider it was necessary to take back with the king. I simply checked the latest game in my database, which happened to be the Ginger GM game. Indeed, he must have been sleepy

Thank you for the overview @ThrillerFan, I have it noted it down.

Regarding the line you said you played:

I have to say, as a first time French player, this looks like an uphill battle for Black. How were you able to pull out 5/5 wins in this variation?

I will be simple minded and argue that White has more space and easier development. Is that all a mirage and Black is in fact completely fine here? 8.Qg4 looks immediately annoying. If he is fine I imagine we would be walking a tight rope for a few more moves.

Whats the problem with 8. Qg4?  after 8..Nc6 it seems risky for white to take on g7.

I watched Romain Edouard videos, it should be the most honest, as a player the guy peaked at 2702. so he knows the high level and has a clarity of vision on openings due to the heavy work he has done to get there.
The repertoire is very well balanced between solidity and prospective of winning.
This is very good work, and not an overwhelming load of information.