fling wrote on 10/26/15 at 19:09:49:

Yes, ChessPublishing must be easily the best source for the Guimard.

As for books, the most recent one I'm aware of that covered it from a Black perspective was a chapter in Dangerous Weapons: The French by John Watson. Some of his book reviews also turn into something like an opening article, for example this one, where among other lines he discussed Tzermiadianos' repertoire suggestion for White based on 6.c3 f6 7.Bb5 http://www.theweekinchess.com/john-watson-reviews/opening-books-en-masse-part-3

Btw. 6.Be2 was also supposed to be critical last time I heard about it, with Yevseev covering it in his otherwise IQP-based repertoire book. I believe Ntirlis has also hinted that it might be the choice in the upcoming White 1.e4 book by John Shaw.

I noticed that in the latest update Watson considered 6. Bd3 f6 7. ef Qxf6 8. Nf1 to be somewhat favorable for White.  I suppose the fact that 6...Nb4 (the other old book move) can transpose to the Universal System would be enough to put off a lot of Guimard folk.

Bibs wrote on 10/25/15 at 13:45:14:


hmm, after consulting my considerable library of French Defence books the only one I can see that gives any decent mention is my old childhood favourite RHM Press book - Gligoric and Uhlmann - the French Defence 1975 (!!!!!)  Surprisingly, given the publication date, this book has proved a minefield of ideas in other lines, however it is obviously out of date. They give 6.Nb3! as best with 6.Be2 leading to a slight edge also.

I recall some strong cuban players playing this line as Black in team matches but I can't recall their names atm. With more time -I can check but over-all the line seems to make sense as a sound way to escape mainstream theory. Recall Nick Pert also trying out ...Nc6 after both 3.Nc3 and 3.Nd2

It's been 4 years since the last update on this post. Interestingly, I came back to India and stopped playing chess in last 4 years. Planning to start again next weekend. Wanted to know what is the latest verdict on the Guimard variation now. I won't have all recent literature available to find it out myself in such a short time and wanted to seek help from this group who always supported me in the past. Thanks in advance.

dom wrote on 07/17/11 at 19:33:42:
True, but I'm thinking more about whether Black can actually reach a playable position! I don't see it yet. Maybe your 7...Be7 is the way forward, although OrangeCounty has suggested some promising ideas for White.

One other thought is to try something radical, i.e.

Joe Gallagher (2534) - Nicolas Curien (2285)
Switzerland 2007
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nc6 4.Ngf3 Nf6 5.e5 Nd7 6.c3 f6 7.Bb5 fxe5 8.dxe5 Be7 9.Nd4 Ndxe5 10.f4 0–0!? 11.fxe5 Nxe5 12.N2f3 Ng4 13.Qe2 e5 14.Nxe5 Rf2 15.Qxg4 Bxg4 16.Kxf2 Bd6 17.Nxg4 Qh4+ 18.g3 Qxg4 unclear, drawn in 49 moves.

Black gets 2 central pawns for the piece sac, with White's king in the centre for the time being. Is that enough comp? Curien did well, but White could search for improvements (e.g. 12.Qe2).

dom wrote on 07/13/11 at 07:55:42:

7...Be7 could turn out to be useful, as I'm having doubts about the alternative 7...fxe5:

Roger Williamson (2184) - Paul Cumbers (2177)
ICC, 16.06.2011

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nc6 4.Ngf3 Nf6 5.e5 Nd7 6.c3 f6 7.Bb5 fxe5 8.dxe5 Be7 9.Nd4 Nxd4 10.cxd4 0–0 11.Bd3 Rf7 (So far so good - my last move seems to have the backing of various French experts, but...) 12.h4!? c5 (if this natural move is a mistake, then I question Black's entire set-up) 13.Nf3 cxd4? (weak, but it's hard to see a good move for Black. 13...g6 14.h5 g5 looks suspicious - Godat v Narkun, LSS email 2009) 14.Bxh7+? (Tweaking the move order with 14.Ng5! Bxg5 15.Bxh7+! gives White the advantage) 14...Kxh7 15.Ng5+ Bxg5?? (Black survives after 15...Kg8 16.Qh5 Bb4+ 17.Kf1 Nxe5) 16.hxg5+ Kg8 17.Qh5 Kf8 18.g6 with a winning position, etc. 1–0

White's h4 idea looks strong to me. Watson's recommendation of 9...Ndxe5 would avoid it (see http://www.chess.co.uk/twic/jwat92.html if you're not a ChessPublishing subscriber), but I'm unconvinced as Black ends up with a passive position.

I'll bite:  Black claims equality since White can't go Nd3 because it hangs the Bb5, so I guess White tries 14 Bxd7 or 14 Bf1.  14 b4 might be interesting too (hence 13 b4!), although in either case, maybe Nb6-c4 is useful to Black in some lines.

14 Bf1 c5 (I assume?) 15 Nd3 Nc6 16 Nde5 is an idea, although it doesn't look like a huge edge.
14 Bxd7 Nxd7 15 Nd3 planning to occupy e5 might be more serious, as if the Bf6 is exchanged, Black is looking at a serious disadvantage.  Which means...
14 Be5 may work, planning to take the second knight when it arrives on e7 or c6.

In other words, even without fancy tactics or real analysis, I see a lot of positive ideas for White.  Compared to the Tarrasch mainlines, isn't Black a little bit less active (No Rook on f8, no Bd6xh2 threats, etc.)?

BPaulsen wrote on 07/13/11 at 13:48:58:


Yes BPaulsen, ... sorry  ...: 3...Nc6
@SF: can you modify my first post and delete this one (useless) ?
Next time, I will use the pgn tag to check a little when I type raw moves

Dom, your game score doesn't make sense.

Paul Cumbers wrote on 03/10/11 at 12:53:47:

...Further contemplation, and now I think I can answer my own question! The key is by comparison with a game mentioned by John Watson on ChessPublishing:

Matkovic-Jacimovic (Kladovo, 1991)
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nc6 4.Ngf3 Nf6 5.e5 Nd7 6.c3 f6 7.exf6 Qxf6 8.Be2 Bd6 9.Nf1 0–0 10.Ng3 h6 11.0–0 Qf7 12.c4 b6 13.Be3 Bb7 ½–½

Note the plan of ...Qf7 (covering d5), and ...h6 (preventing Ng5), getting ready for ...e5 (which, *ahem*, Jacimovic was about to play ). So in my line (b), after 9...a6 10.Be2, Black should continue to prepare the freeing move ...e5, e.g. 10...0-0 11.Ne3 Qf7 12.0-0 h6 13.Bd3 Nf6 14.Qc2 e5 (hooray!). The g6 weakness doesn't seem to matter too much. Other bishop retreats on move 10 can be met with the immediate 10...e5:

(b1) 9...a6 10.Bd3 (clumsy) 10...e5 11.Ne3 Nb6=;

(b2) 9...a6 10.Ba4 e5 11.Ne3 exd4 12.Nxd5?! Qe6+ 13.Qe2 Nc5! exposing the weakness of the bishop on a4.

So I reckon 9...a6! is Black's best response to 9.Bb5 (Guimard was right all along)

I didn't look at the entire game, but I'm always interested in Guimard lines because I play it as black.

In my opinion, white didn't play the most testing move with 7.exf6 because it lets black play 7...Qxf6 and achieve e5 easily, with an active position. Did you consider what would have happened if white played the more testing (and more aggressive) 7.Nh4!?

In my experience, most players who play 6.c3 in this line do so with the intention of keeping their position solid, as in the main line Tarrasch. However, the real point of 6.c3 should be to follow up with Nh4, threatening a dangerous queen sortie to h5.

That's not to say this line is busted, but just something to consider for next time.