best variations to play against french defence

What you said is correct.  I played the French from 1997 to 2007, and quit playing it because while I could deal with the issues for Black after 3.Nc3, I wasn't willing to deal with two problems, 3.Nc3 and 3.e5 (many new ideas, all favoring White, came about around that time - 3.Nc3 is still the strongest, but 3.e5 has superceded 3.Nd2, which gives White nothing - I consider an equal game "nothing" for White - not saying 3.Nd2 is refuted, it's simply no better than 3.exd5).

That said, to me, against the Winawer, you need to go main line.  See below:

In addition, check out the following article that I posted back in 2012.  Both games contain flaws, but in both cases, with correct play, White gets a significant, if not winning, advantage.  The results were a draw and a win for White.

http://www.ncchess.org/wordpress/2012/02/deja-vu/#more-1486

ThrillerFan, perhaps you best tell Michael Adams (fide rated 19) the Tarrasch is utter crap because he apparently does not know.

Or maybe Michael Adams is afraid of the French and just wants a draw, so he plays the Tarrasch!

As Anand once said, if White wants a draw, White has a draw.  Unless White is playing the final round for a big title where a draw is all he needs, lines that lead to a dead draw are a moral victory for Black and utter crap for White in my book!

As shown in a previous post, the percentages are under 51% for White if Black plays the best lines, which tend to be the more modern ideas, not the old ...Nc6 lines.

Go to the week in chess, go to the archives, pull up 9/1/2014, search for McCartney, and go to the game from the US Open that is the 5th round.  That game I was the Black side of an Exchange French (via transposition).

That game ought to tell you what I think of the Exchange for White!  Along with the Tarrasch - It's garbage!  White gets no advantage!

I have played both sides of the french for at least 30 of my 40+ years in tournament chess .  My personal experience is that in the Tarrasch the % of draws goes up while the % of wins and loses goes down .  The Tarrasch involves less risk than 3 Nc3 involves . If you check a reliable data base I believe this is also the case .  In US weekend swisses you need to win , especially with white so 3 Nc3 is a better/more logical choice .  You will win and lose more and there will be fewer draws .  The Tarrasch appeals to those players who dont like to risk much :  Karpov is a fine example of such a player . 

I have come to the conclusion after a couple of decades that Nc3 is the way to go. I've tried the KIA, Advance and Monte Carlo Exchange - putting in quite a bit of work on the latter with mixed results.

I suppose I've resisted Nc3 , not wanting to "play into black's hands". From the perspective of the black player, this resistance to avoid the main lines is welcome !

i just do the exchange variation - takes the wind out of black's sails

The OP who posted this question has a standard rating of 1376 and a blitz rating of 1471. Therefore, the potential drawish nature of Tarrasch is not so relevant.

Speaking as a French defence player and an e4 player of a more similar level to the OP I would say that the Tarrasch is a perfectly good approach. The resulting positions from the c5 Tarrasch (with either exd5 or Qxd5) or 3Nf6 will probably appeal more to an e4 player than the more closed nature of the Advanced and the dullness of the Exchange variation. Whereas, 3Nc3 is possibly too theory heavy.

The business of a line being "too theoretical" is interesting. John Nunn famously said the main lines are the main lines for a reason. If we attempt a main line then : either us or our opponent has to think at a position not seen before. If it is them fine. If it is us, then good. We can try and find a good move in position that must be OK. If we subsequently screw it up we can learn after the game and in our next foray into the jungle we can travel with confidence a little further than we did before - all the time seeking best moves..

Interesting games Thriller....

3.Nc3 is by far the best move imo. The KIA is an aggressive second option for me.

Here's how I rank White's 3rd moves, best to worst:

3.Nc3 (+/= to +/- in some lines)

3.e5 (+/= using the newer ideas from the mid-2000s, = for older lines, =/+ for Milner-Barry Gambit)

2.d3/3.Nd2 (= to +/= in a few lines)

3.Nd2 (=)

3.exd5 (=)

3.All other Moves (=/+)

About 12...d4 in a Winawer poisoned pawn, I thought current opinion was that it was black's best try. Kamsky and other very strong players have played it. Berg has written a very detailed book around it for Quality chess, and thinks 12h4 rather than 12Qd3 is currently white's most testing line. Again thinks should answer this with 12...d4, rather than 12...b6.

I rate all reasonble lines equal as all lines end in a draw with optimum play.

To all ye players of little faith in the Advance French that I preached last week (and to those of you that don't buy into the fact that the Tarrasch is garbage is Black gains full equality instantly with 3...c5), here's a case to back up my argument.  This game was played on the top board in the final round of a 3-rounder on Saturday immediately after I took down the top seed in round 2.  As you will see in the notes, I may have made one slight slip-up late, but Black didn't take advantage of it.  Despite that, the correct move on move 36 by White proves that White is winning.  Of interest are the position after Black's 19th move, and the tactics starting at move 29 for White.

Your opponent should have played 8... f6  or  9... f6  with better chances than in the game .  You played a nice game .  Your opponent must not have GM Moskalenko's  The Flexible French where this old system with 6... c4 is covered nicely with recommendations for black in this old system that he calls the " labyrinths of the old system " .  For something very different he recommends  5... Nh6  or  6... Nh6 .  I highly recommend his book for any serious devotee of the french defense . 

Congratulations to Sir Paul Mccartney for not only his musical talent but also for his chess!

LOL - Thanks - But unfortunately, that P is Patrick, not Paul.  If I had his money, I'd be retired by now!

Hey ThrillerFan, I really like that game, but as an 1800ish player I cannot say I fully understand why h4 needed to be played before Bh3, and what the point of Nf1 was. This is not criticism- I am wondering this because I might want to play the Adcvance myself and I want to understand it better. I know these are standard maneuvers in the Advance, but I am interested in playing the Advance and I want to know why these are played. Thanks.

After the straightforward 9Bh3 black can play on the kingside with 9...Be7 10 0.0?! g5 followed by h5. In the game continuation, the first thing which struck me was black castled on the wrong-side. Eingorn suggests 9....0.0.0 10Bh3 f5!?, or 9...Nh6 10Bh3 f5.

It didn't seem to be one of black's better days. Wonder what 13....Rae8 was trying to acheive, for example.

Thriller you should play me in the advanced French to see what you have up your sleeve.