What are the ideas for White in the Monte Carlo (French Defense)?

I wish someone would reply to this, because I'd like to know the answer, too! I always feel uncomfortable playing IQP systems. I know the IQP is supposed to give support for a knight on c5 or e5 (but surely it would do that just as well if it was supported itself?) and that it's supposed to give attacking chances (why?). Also that you're supposed to advance the IQP when you get the chance (which usually leads to my losing it). So what are the benefits of the Monte Carlo system, or the Panov-Botvinnik against the Caro-Kann, or the Tarrasch for Black?

The Tarrasch for Black is almost refuted ever since coming up with the 6.dxc5 line for White.  White gets the Bishop pair for basically nothing, and Black's endgame stinks in that line.

As for the Monte Carlo, I have nothing good to say about it except THANK YOU for playing it against me.  3.Nc3, 3.e5, and 2.d3 are far more challenging than any line of the Exchange Variation, and 4.c4 is also no good as, unlike the Panov, Black's e-pawn is out of his way rather than the c-pawn.  With the e-pawn removed, both Bishops develop freely, unlike the Panov (especially the 5...e6 line), where the LSB can be a problem.

You play 3.exd5, with or without 4.c4, I'm a very happy camper.  That's about all I can say about that junk line!

Read Alexander Baburin's 'Winning Pawn Structures'. It deals exclusively with IQP positions.

it obviously doesn't pose any threat to the french defense but it is quite playable and one of the main ideas is probably to get black somewhat out of their book as this isn't the most popular choice against the french. You can play such lines for 1 game but if your game gets published people can prepare for this rather easily and then they will comfortably equalize. So my best guess is that the main idea of this opening is just to get a playable position as it is clear that black's position is very solid here.

Hope this answers it.

You think it has to be the most popular for us French gurus to know it?

You think Najdorf players like Kasparov are clueless against the Alapin or Closed Sicilian?  Playing the Alapin against the Sicilian is like playing the Exchange French.  French players will know it!

I played the Monte Carlo for a season or two. IMO it gives black a very slight edge owing to white making an extra pawn move in an open position. However this can be offset by the first player's experience and possibly strength relative to the second player's. The player N Miezes has made a specialty of the opening:

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1026239

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normunds_Miezis

In playing through some of his Monte Carlo games you see its all about piece play in open positions where strategic themes are more in the background and subservient to a move from white or black that can gain or lose the initiative.

There is nothing wrong with the French exchange. Check a recent Rapport game in the Bundesliga where he crushed his opponent (a GM, not a random online player saying the F exchange is junk).

I think its a good idea to avoid the symmetry that arise from the exchange variation, which otherwise simplify the game for black. I like to vary between my lines against the french (Tarrasch, Exchange...etc), and I like to use the Monte Carlo variation against inexperienced opponents, where they tend to reply with 4...c6 or 4...dxc4, which are not as good as  4...Nf6 or 4...Bb4+ for black.

Its why I like offbeat lines like the accelerated panov attack or ponziani, its not true that we are surrounded by Kasparovs that know every variation of whatever defense they are playing.

If Black is in dire need of a win, you might be able to play head games with the Exchange, but if Black is content with a draw, cherry picking a single GM game, or even a bunch of GM games, is a complete and utter joke!

Cicak(2543) - Nikolic(2657) - Bundesliga 2001.  Guess Who Won?  I can cherry pick just as well as you can.  Doesn't validate anything.

The facts are, in 22905 Games with 3.exd5, White scored 46.45% (27.1% wins, 38.7% draws, 34.2% losses).  That is awful for White.  Those are numbers that Black should be satisfied with.  White should never be satisfied with a below 50% score.

(Source - 365chess.com)

Throw in 3...exd5 4.c4 and yes, it increases to 50.5%.  Still terrible numbers for White.

How about 3.Nc3?  What do you think that scores for White?  How about 56.25%?  (40.7% wins, 31.1% losses, 28.2% losses).  If there is any reason that the French has been on the decline, it's because of 3.Nc3, not 3.exd5 (Pa-Leez!)

I'm confused by this.  Are you saying that black responding to the Tarrasch (3.Nd2) with 3...c5 has been refuted? 

@Lastrank, the comment was about the Tarrasch Defence to the Queen's Gambit (with reference to IQP systems).

As FrogCDE mentioned, it is in reference to the Tarrasch Defense in the QGD, and the specific line is 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c5 4.cxd5 exd5 5.Nf3 Nc6 and now, instead of the older 6.g3, White scores really well with 6.dxc5! d4 7.Na4 Bxc5 8.Nxc5 Qa5+ 9.Bd2 Qxc5 10.Rc1 Qb6 11.e3.

For example, in 365chess.com, this has been played 30 times with 19 wins for White and 11 draws.  Black doesn't win a single game.  Now in other databases, I'm sure you'll find a win or two for Black, but from a percentage perspective (% of White wins plus half the percentage of draws), while White may not score over 80 percent as he has here, I'll be it's really high for White (over 60% almost certainly).

The norm for White is about 54%.

Pfren, your example is in the 6.g3 line.  I make no claim that black is not ok in that line.

My claim is 6.dxc5.  The laws of statistics say you need 30 for a valid sample size.  In the line I gave in post 14, 30 games on the dot were played and not a single game was won by Black.  What has that got to do with engine fanatics?  I am basing nothing on what an engine says.  Engine could say -1.5.  Do not care.  Statistics do not lie!

The 9 move draw you show was probably prearranged.

Svane-Mamedov was 6.dxc5 and agreed drawn on move 26. It does indeed look comfortable for Black.

That's interesting. Chess.com Explorer returns good stats as well.

why play d4? queen's indian accelerated refutes d4 as it favors black after few moves according to statistics. statistics do not lie, lol

Sorry, missed that it scrolled.  Thought Bd2 was the end of it because of the hard return after it.

If by the accelerated Queen's Indian, you mean 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 b6, I refute your play with the Trumpowsky (2.Bg5).  The whole system is a cover up, so it won't look like there is anything wrong for Black, just like how the cover up is supposed to trick Americans into thinking all is well, or Brexit is supposed to trick Britain into thinking all is well.  Russia seems to have the advantage, and so 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 must be advantage Black!