Photophore,

Without responding directly to your question I'd like to point out a rather curious suggestion by Bent Larsen:

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.ed5 ed5 5.Qf3!?

In effect, this is an exchange French rather than a Winawer, but Larsen showed some nice tactics to justify it.  It's not considered very dangerous today but I bet it would score well in blitz or against a player who only knows a few lines of the French well.

(BTW, playing an early e5 for White relieves the pressure on e4 caused by Bb4.  I'm surprised that it seems to be the only move played at high levels, but it clearly has good strategic motives behind it.)

"I dont see any way around 3 Nc3 if you want the game to get open and agressive."
Not a single bad word on 3.Nc3, but White has another option: 2.b3 - invented by Réti and also played by Spielmann, the two most dangerous gambiteers of their time.

Yep is a very exciting game. Timman analyses it in one of his earliest books.

But back to topic. I dont see any way around 3 Nc3 if you want the game to get open and agressive. 3Nd2 just doesnt cut it enough for that, though it is imo almost equally as good as 3Nc3. 3 e5 closes the position up. The exchange and KIA are just too passive.

I am not even sure he played it 7 times, but his record against the Winawer in blitz and simuls is a bit worse in any case. Especially in simuls he has a lot of draws and a couple of losses.

BtW Larsen played the Winawer, because Fischer had switched from 4 e5 to 4 a3 with mixed success, so he would be unsure of a good white system. Still the opening was not to blame for Larsen's loss.

lost,

If what you say on the last portion of your post is true, then it was bad match strategy by Larsen who played it against Bobby with the intention to unsettle him somewhat in that candidates match of 1971.

The world is split into two groups of people....

I they don't then I wouldn't know what will...

@Taljechin, 

Thanks for the great games, there were several interesting ones listed on that site, not just the French game you mentioned.

@Dom and Photophore, inter alia:

Someone who plays the White side of the Najdorf and chooses Bg5 shouldn't be afraid of learning a little theory in the French.  The theory of the French Opening changes very slowly compared to the Najdorf, so extra study now will pay off for years.   

There are many ways for White to handle the Winawer, so I won't list them all.  Among the obscure lines that an aggressive player might like are: 4:a3, 4.Bd2 (which isn't highly recommended but has scored well) and of course 4.Qg4

The main line with 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bc3 6.bc3 will require that you learn to play against both Ne7 and Qc7.  If you follow the threads here, you will learn more about both lines than you will ever need!

Your concern about Black playing the Rubinstein or Burn is well-founded; they both promise hard fights.  But you should not be afraid of either one.   

Just as with Caro-Kann players, the defenders of the Burn and Rubinstein fall neatly into two categories:  weakies who play the line because of its drawish reputation (no worries there) and strong players who play the opening to win!   

What more can you ask of an opening for White than to have a good chance to win (or lose) in every major variation?   

There are no easy draws for Black in the French, except perhaps in some Exchange lines and some French Tarrasches with ...c5.  The White side often cashes in with great sacrifices such as the classic Trojan Bishop (Bxh7+) sac and many others.   

Just take a look at some of the players who have defended the White side of 3.Nc3: Capablanca; Alekhin; Smyslov; Tal; Bronstein; Fischer; Kasparov; and many present-day super-GMs.  If it's good enough for them....