Offbeat lines against the french?

Thanks for taking your time to look through my games and point out my errors! In the game you selected i played the correct opening moves but definitely failed finding the tactics.

Even if i do make it through the opening i usually find it difficult to figure out what to do, where to place my pieces and keep defending the centre. Here is a recent example. I played this game just before starting this thread. As soon as i was out of my theory knowledge i started to make blunders according to the engine (from move 8 and onwards). I ended up cowardly taking a draw to avoid the risk of a loss.

Try the Diemer-Duhm.

The classic French Breaker!

In that game, you traded off your light-squared bishop for no reason and placed all your pawns on dark squares.  Effectively, you gave yourself a bad bishop for no good reason.  Against the early c5 push, you should open up the center:

That is the most critical line when you play the Tarrasch, and Black can equalize with best play, but that is something you are not going to worry about at the sub-master level.

I never knew when to open up the centre but i will try playing the way you suggest. It relieves a lot of the tension and hopefully makes the position less burdensome for white. 

If black plays a6, or Bd7 followed by a6, is the correct course of action to trade my bishop for the knight instead of retreating? Is there any general plan for white's dark square bishop afterwards, like fianchetto it on b2 (develop it and put the pawns on light squares, since the light square bishop has been traded?

Me: Have you ever heard of the eiffel tower ?

Parisian: ooh la la...the tour eiffel. oui...oui madam !

Me: can you tell me where it is ?

Parisian: uhh...uhhhh non madam. i've only seen it in the sky. de sole. i'm sorry.

With the center opened up, you would prefer to trade your knight for one of Black's bishops to gain the bishop pair (but that is not always possible).  But you have a 2-0 development lead (with Black to move) so the important thing is to keep getting developed.  Against most of Black's moves, you would castle next, develop the dark-square bishop to e3/f4/g5 and bring the rooks towards the center.  At that point, you are deep into the middlegame and need to come up with a plan based on what Black has done.

2. b3 is a pretty awesome line. You can castle queenside and gambit the e4 pawn.

That is the most played line there, and White has not scored well at the master level with it.  The main problem is fianchettoing and then castling to the side you fianchettoed combined with the difficulty in avoiding trading off dark-squared bishops makes White's king a bit dodgy.  If I could get these types of positions as Black all the time, I would play the French all the time.  As White, the main lines are simply better, so why deviate from them (unless you just like to play weird stuff)?

To get the player out of their prep? The overall score is not bad. I used to play against a 2100 who played it against me and it gave me some trouble at first. If I knew an alternative line that was really that great I probably wouldn't share it on here since I'm a french defense player

5...Bb4 may well be even better than 5...Be7.

This is effectively provocating 0-0-0 (white cannot take the e4 pawn because d2 is hanging) and after 6.0-0-0 he may either load the typical battery with 6...Qe7, or even play the audacious 6...Bxc3!? 7.dxc3 Qe7, when white has compensation for the pawn, but the position is far from being one which can be played on autropilot.

I don't know if anyone has mentioned it, but the 2.b3 french is quite strong.

For some reason I don't feel like getting a player out of their prep is always such a great thing.

Sometimes people 'in their prep' make silly blunders because they are not adapting, and when people are completely out of their prep they play their best chess because they are actually calculating stuff on every single move...

Not always the case but... If something off-beat has bad stats, just getting someone "out of their prep" isn't necessarily great... Depends on style of course...

Going "Anti-Prep" is not the answer at all!  Like you said, trying to deviate on your opponent will simply cause him or her to focus.  Also, your opponent may actually know it!

Play what YOU understand, not what you might THINK your opponent doesn't understand.

I see IMs and GMs try to play stuff like 1.b3 not because it is their main opening - they will play 1.e4 or 1.d4 against equal opposition - but because they think it will lead to a "non-theoretical" game because their opponent "Won't know it".

Well, I had a 2447 play against me over the board in 2010.  I was 1999 at the time, and I was Black.  The game started 1.b3 e5 2.Bb2 Nc6 3.e3 d5 4.Bb5 Bd6 5.f4 Qh4+ 6.g3 Qe7 7.Nf3 f6 8.fxe5 fxe5 9.Bxc6+ bxc6 10.Nxe5 Nf6 11.Nd3?! (A dubious move - After 11.Nxc6 Qe4 12.O-O Bh3, the position is equal) 11...Qe4 and 0-1 (59).

Someone could try to play 1.b4 against me, but because I have played it myself as White a good 300 times over the board and 400 times here, you aren't going to outplay me via "me not knowing it".

When I play Black, you know what scores best against me?  Lines like the following:

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3

1.d4 e6 2.c4 f5 3.g3 Nf6 4.Bg2 d5 5.Nh3

Lines that are actually dangerous for Black!  Take my most recent over the board tournament in late July.  I had 4 wins, 2 draws, and 1 loss.  What was the loss?  I was Black in a French McCutchen, which starts with the moves in the first of the 2 dangerous lines mentioned!

Main lines are main lines for a reason!  I quit playing the Sicilian as Black because of the Open Sicilian, not because of some weasel line like the c3-Sicilian.  If I could be guaranteed an Anti-Sicilian every time, I'd play the Sicilian!

I quit playing the King's Indian because of the Mar Del Plata!

Main lines of whatever opening you play are the most difficult to face.  I play 1.b4 as White.  The most annoying defense to face?  The Exchange Variation (2...Bxb4 3.Bxe5).  What would I play as Black against 1.b4?  1...e5 2.Bb2 Bxb4!

Main lines are main lines for a reason!

The 2. b3 variation has a 41% win rate for white 22% draw and 37% win rate for black on the chess.com database. This is not a bad win rate. Of course playing an opening that you are well prepared in and your opponent is not likely to be well prepared in is one benefit to playing the opening. All this said main lines are main lines for a reason and 2. d4 is theoretically better.

With b3 you want e3 and f4, not e4...?

Interesting stuff.

But I guess not everoyne is a tournament player like you.

I have a friend who is 2100 lichess (I guess about 1900 here?) 

The guy knows no theory. He falls for the center fork trick I tell you.

I always get him in the opening, and he always somehow manages to activate his pieces like crazy activity counter play and beats me. I almost beat him several times but never managed... I even got active myself one time and that was the closest I got to beating him.

My point is he only played chess seriously as a kid, now he just plays casually and online.

He would get crushed in tournaments for sure... but for him (and just with his non theoretical style), I guess getting someone out of prep is almost a guaranteed win. So my point is it depends on style, especially if we are talking practical online, and this guy's style is just being absolute trash at openings but very good at middlegame and endgame... But for me personally everything you said is completely relevant   

Another option is 2. d3 going for a King's Indian set up. I see this one a lot lately. Interesting game.

That would make him about 1100 on chess.com, and about 900 USCF (only half kidding there!)

The hardest thing in chess is to win a won game.  Many times, when you know the game is won, it is hard to continue focusing and you let things slip.  Other times, you simply take too many risks and blunder away your advantage, or play too passively and give your opponent counterplay.  The act of killing counterplay and simplifying the game is a skill that takes development.

It isn't so much a style, but a mindset.  There are people who play better when they know they are losing.  They get more creative, find ways to generate tactical threats, and wait for you to crumble under pressure.  It is basically the inverse of the "winning a won game" problem - they know they are losing and are trying to find a way to swindle it.

But that said, when you come out of the opening with a better position, it makes it easier to find good moves.  That is why intentionally playing dubious or sub-optimal moves just to try to get your opponent out of book is not all that useful (and can often backfire).  If you are going to play those, do it because you know the positions better than almost anyone, not because you are hoping to get your opponent out of book on move 2 (if you are going to do that, just play the Bongcloud or the Grob as your opponent will almost certainly be out of book by move 2 there!)

Can 2. b3 really be considered dubious though? It has a positive win rate and lots of GMs have played it. It is just another somewhat reasonable alternative to 2. d4. Dubov played it just recently at GM level in 2021. It's not like you're just playing h4 or something just to get an unexpected position.

I'm interested in discussing other alternatives though. Has anyone looked into 2. Qe2 much? This is a move I have hardly played against or studied but seems reasonable.

The Alekine-Chatard is a nice variation, I recommend it.