Bogojump wrote on 08/16/09 at 11:12:47:


Miles defeated Karpov with St. George. One single game does not say anything about the theoretical status of the opening. Also as far as I remember Kasparov reacted very well in the opening, Khalifman follows him up until move 13 in "Opening For White according to Anand, vol. 6" after which he suggests 14.Bg2 instead of 14.f5, played by Kasparov.

Radjabov defeated Kasparov wıth the French.

A few years ago, I did a statistical survey of my success rate with the French.  At that time, I scored approximately 70% with it as Black.  Not bad, eh?  This included wins over one 2400, a few 2200s, and several people right below that rating.  Also, a draw against GM David Bronstein (albeit in a simul).  And my rating during these years was a solid B-player... 1650-1860 (I say B-player because I spent more time there than in the A category).   

I don't worry very much about "success rates" of top GMs because I'm not a top GM.  I try to learn and understand the positions, and because I've gotten familiar with them over the years, I play them well, and I would confidently play the French against Kramnik, Topalov, Anand, or anyone else.  I'd lose, but I think you play better in openings that lead to middlegames you're familiar with.

Then there is the element of fashion.  A few years ago, the French was all the rage, and you would be hard pressed to find a "top GM" who didn't at least dabble in it (Kasparov being the exception, of course).

I think it's a very bad idea to base your openings on what "top GMs" are playing.  THat can be an element in your decision, of course, but it is more important to find out where you are comfortable, and go with that.  This involves, at least, looking at other openings (for example, I have never played the black side of 1.e4 e5, but I have no issues with looking deeply into Open games, because I think it can add to my understanding of the game).  All you need to do is look at the many transpositions from the Ruy Lopez to the Kings Indian.  I don't consider the Ruy that tactical, especially compared to the Kings Indian, but you have to know when the transpositions occur, and how to handle positions that do, and don't, transpose.  I look at the most boring Queens Indians and the most ridiculous openings, such as the Grob or the Mekele Mobele (I'm sure the spelling is wrong).  As long as I can learn something from it, I'll look at it.  This is the approach I think everyone below IMs should have.  So I don't think it's relevant what "top GMs" are playing this week.  Like the weather in San Francisco, it is highly subject to change.   

kylemeister wrote on 07/17/09 at 18:23:46:


If memory serves me well the same has been said of Maroczy.

Some statistics from Mega2008

Korchnoi as Black
1-0        68 games  = 18%  Total 40%
1/2-1/2 166 games = 44%
0-1       144 games = 38% Total 60%

Korchnoi as WHite
1-0         15 games = 56% Total 72%
1/2-1/2     9 games = 33%
0-1           3 games =   4% Total 26%

Uhlmann as Black
1-0       108 games = 21% Total 44%
1/2-1/2 242 games = 46%
0-1       172 games = 33% Total 56%

Personally, the French never game me much trouble as white, it's not even drawish like the CK or the dreaded Petroff, it just gives white  very nice play and initiative.

I was looking through chessgames.com at the games of Victor Korchnoi in the French and saw some pretty short wins by white, especially by strong 1.e4 players like Kasparov, Anand and Morozevich.

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1220562

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1005713

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1266342

Those games certainly create the impression that on the highest of chess levels, black must play very accurately just to survive out of the opening without getting mated.

On 2600 Elo level we dont talk about only strong players. We talk about proffessionals who live on what they earn from chess.

I think that one can see in general that players on that level most often chose openings that do NOT give white an inch of advantage in terms of space and initiative. There are of course exeptions. And the French defense belongs to these black openings that gives white an oportunity to win space and initiative immediately.

On 2600 Elo level they go for not giving your oponent ANY advantage at all. Even at the cost of their own winning chances. The only advantage they give to white is the unavoidable first move advantage.

French is absolutely not a bad opening but it is an opening where you very often has to defend your position....play for counterplay. It is not EASY to be a defender against a player 2600 ELO...if they get the initiative. So therefor I think many 2600 player dont even bother playing those positions. Why should they when they can equalize easier with the Petroff or the Berlin wall or fight harder with an extra pawn in the center with the sicilian ? They see no reason.

I myself respect the french and did not like to face it when I played 1.e4. Today I avoid the french from both sides by playing  1.Nf3 and Najdorf as black. KID vs 1.d4.