Thanks Scarblac for the link to my article. Readers may appreciate knowing that it also includes (at the end) an extensive bibliography covering most sources mentioned in this thread, with the exception of "Avrukh," which I will have to track down:http://www.kenilworthchessclub.org/games/java/2009/fr-ex-c4.htm
After researching the line for a couple years, I am still surprised that I have not found any extensive theoretical treatment of it from the White side. There is a piece by Mednis in his *Practical Opening Tips*, but it is not very complete. So I am still looking -- or working to fill the void. One of the respondents to my blog also points out that "Josh Waitzkin annotates a couple games in this line in the Chessmaster audio tutorials" -- which I have not yet checked out.http://www.kenilworthchessclub.org/kenilworthian/2009/08/french-defense-monte-ca...
I wish someone like Waitzkin or Ashley would write up his notes for general consumption, or that someone would include a chapter in a repertoire book. I think it is an appealing choice for many players even if Black should be able to equalize if he knows what he's doing.
I would appreciate any additional resources, especially if accompanied by complete citation information for easy reference. In the old days, when there was relatively little chess literature, a simple name reference was sufficient for locating material. But these days there are so many resources out there -- and in so many languages -- that it helps to have complete bibliographic data.
I got into playing the Monte Carlo French Exchange because I was also reading Baburin, and the game he gave of Kasparov vs. Fritz 3 gave me a sense of the tactical potential of the line. I also recommend Yuri Razuvaev's excellent "You were right, Monsieur La Bourdonnais!" from Dvoretsky and Yusupov's *Secrets of Opening Preparation* (Olms 2007): 170-180, which mostly considers positions where Black takes immediately at c4, saving White a critical tempo.
The comments about tempi in this sharp and double edged line are very true, and I think it all comes down to who blinks first. Black indeed does best to wait on dxc4 and probably lines with c6 and no dxc4 are good (though I don't consider them at any length). In some ways, I think of the Monte Carlo as a psychological choice more than anything, and I have had good experiences with this line against French players who favor closed and strategic variations and hate when things get too sharp. I sometimes feel like I am forcing them to play the Black side of the Giuoco Piano or Evans Gambit, which most would never do willingly.
It is definitely worth a try for those interested in learning more about IQP positions, and it helps complete a repertoire against the Scandinavian with 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.c4 when 3...c6 4.d4! gives you the Panov-Botvinnik -- and 3...e6! (better in my view) 4.d4! will give you the Monte Carlo.