@ slates

Keep on working on 3...Bf5 in the advanced

Has anyone noticed all the Caro-Kanns Topalov has been playing recently?

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.pl?page=2&player=Topalov&playercomp=either&...

Must be some sort of a preparation for Kamsky, who has also shown a predilection for the opening lately... 

I quite like 11... Qa5+ 12. Bd2 Bb4 13. c3 Be7 14. c4 Qc7 but I would admit that White is still White there (i.e. "+="), though like most lines of the Caro whether he can make progress without losing control is another matter.

If I was playing White, I think that White should search for an advantage with 3. e5 Bf5 4. Nd2 and 4. h4 which is still very underexplored. There are two recent articles in NIC yearbook which make an excellent start. 

One question which has bothered me slightly over the years is what to do vs. the Panov. I think White is definitely "+=" after 5... e6 though Black has reasonable practical results. Like Dreev I much prefer 5... Nc6 and for years I have been playing the "equal" endgame. I am thinking of trying out Houska's 9... Nb6. To be honest, I am not sure if its really as unplayable as what some posters here seem to say (this includes guys like tracke, whose opinions on the caro-kann I greatly admire and respect otherwise...). I see that Kamsky has also played the (dubious!?) 5... g6 recently.

Any thoughts?

MNb wrote on 08/24/08 at 14:29:40:


The exchange french itself leads to two pawn structures already (4. c4 and 4. Bd3/4. Nf3). I also haven't included wickelman-reimer gambit, and you know... all the 4. Bd2/4. a3/4. Qg4/5. dxc5 Winawer sidelines, i'm sure i could think of more in say the Maccutcheon and the Steinitz...

lnn2 wrote on 08/24/08 at 07:50:03:


Well, Black does not need to play
3. Nd2 c5 4. ed5 Qd5 or 4... ed5, so we can cross that one off.

"Two knights 2. Nf3 d5 3. Nc3 often leads to quite unique pawn structures too." - only if Black wants it to - there is no theoretical problem with 3...Nf6.

I appreciate what you are saying, though, and perhaps we are just using the word "structure" slightly differently.

I would say that one of the main characteristics of the French is the persistence of the characteristic e6,d5 structure well into the middle game and often the endgame. 

Of course, different variations produce slightly different structures (well categorized in Mastering the French by McDonald & Harley, in ten (!) chapters) but most are just different evolutions of the same basic blocked French centre. That's its attraction in fact - Black might be theoretically a bit worse (in fact I'm sure he is worse in most lines), but this is compensated by the fact that he is generally fighting on ground of his choosing, or at least on very familiar, or similar, terrain.

As Ziegler shows in his French Repertoire DVD, it is possible to devise a French repertoire that reaches the typical blocked French structure probably more than 90% of the time.

I was struck by these words of GM Daniel King writing in the Guardian:

"As with all openings, however, there are areas of difficulty. How to time the thematic ...f6 break? How to get the so-called "bad French bishop" on c8 into the game? How to prevent White establishing a knight on d4 - especially unpleasant if Black's own knights and dark-squared bishop have been swapped off?

Preparing a new opening involves memorising the most common variations (sorry, there's just no way round this), appreciating the main strategies, and studying the most important games. A tall order. But with the French, the same pawn structure often recurs: White pawns on d4 and e5, and Black's solid pawn chain d5, e6, and f7. Even if a variation looks unfamiliar, an understanding of the structure should help you devise a strategy. At first Black's position appears cramped, but the central pawn chain gives enough security to counterattack on the flanks."

Thanks Inn2!!!

I had the same idea in mind, but your posting was faster.

I've played both defenses over years and my results in the Caro are still miles better than in the French.
I think the pawn structure in the Caro is just safer and a more important fact for this is the "white squared" bishop for black!!

Due to this the Caro is just easier to play!!!!!

Yesterday I made a test in our club. I let some novice players play the French and in return the Caro. After the games we had some analyses and discussions. The final result was that everybody felt more comfortable with the Caro !!!

Why? Easier piece play, a better pawn structure and less tactics were the answers !!
Surely for an established chess player secondary(he has a better know how to handle these positions f.ex.the timing in pushing or not the "f"pawn in the French), but for a novice player primary,who still has not this feeling.

For me, both defenses are sound and good weapons, but saying the French is easier to play, I have serious doubts !!!

>>That's why, although the French might be theoretically a second rate defence (e.g. according to Sveshnikov, who thinks that 1...c5 is best and 1...e5 second best) and currently not popular at the highest level, it is a very practical choice.

I'm not sure that I would base my claim that the French is second rate theoretically on Sveshnikov, as his opening views often contradict much of GM praxis.  Another point that needs to be taken into account is the wide variety of stylistic choices for Black in the French.  He/She can play in an attacking style, positional style, a mix of both.  So, I think it's possible to form a repertoire in the French that is highly respected at GM level and would not be thought of as second rate by anyone.   

Scott

Thanks Paddy, interesting points, I'll spend some more time looking at the French I think. Meanwhile I think I'll also take a look at the 3...Bf5 Advance - I never really felt convinced that 3...c5 was correct, despite plentiful support for it.