MNb wrote on 05/22/10 at 21:17:12:

The French really has an irrational element to it. With such hyper-drawish lines as 3.exd5 exd5 4.Bf4 available to White, it's highly inconsistent for Black to combine this with super-sharp stuff like the 3...Nf6 main line with ...Qc7 or the Winawer Poisoned Pawn!

So when planning my main French repertoire I try to choose solid, "serious" lines like 3..c5 4.exd5 exd5 5.Ngf3 Nf6, which I've played in just one tournament game (ironically I won - it's possible to blunder in even the calmest positions!). When I just want to have fun AND White is kind enough to not play the Exchange (both very common in practice), I may try dangerous stuff like 3.Nd2 Nf6 or even 3...Nc6!?.

By the way I thought the 3..c5 4.exd5 exd5 line with ...Nf6 and answering the check with ...Bd7 was the equalizer, while White has more chances for advantage against Uhlmann and Korchnoi's old ...Nc6 lines. Though I don't really know recent theory well deeply enough to decide.

In these days of repertoire books and Dangerous Weapons and Secret Surprises (as opposed to traditional opening books), maybe some publisher should put out "Innocuous Crap That Was Omitted."  A bit like Joni Mitchell's "Misses" album, perhaps.

Gilchrist is a legend wrote on 05/22/10 at 14:09:59:

Yes, that it is such a complete equalizer that it's drawing rating only is surpassed by the Petrov and the Slav Exchange. Uhlmann's book about the French covers it quite extensively.

5...Nf6 has indeed been the more modern tendency.  I've seen some sources giving it as leading to equality; the most recent quickie reference I have seems to think White should get "a tiny edge."  Yusupov by the way still plays the "old-school" 5...Nc6.

Gilchrist is a legend wrote on 05/22/10 at 14:09:59:


Well, a few decades ago it was much more common than 4...Qxd5.  It is perhaps generally regarded as a bit better for White with best play.  One player that comes to mind who still plays it is Yusupov.  Incidentally just a few days ago there was this:

[Event "ch-USA"]
[Site "Saint Louis USA"]
[Date "2010.05.18"]
[Round "5"]
[White "Kudrin,S"]
[Black "Kaidanov,G"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteElo "2571"]
[BlackElo "2577"]
[EventDate "2010.05.14"]
[ECO "C09"]

1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. exd5 exd5 5. Ngf3 Nc6 6. Bb5 Bd6 7. dxc5
Bxc5 8. O-O Nge7 9. Nb3 Bd6 10. Re1 O-O 11. Bg5 Bg4 12. Be2 Re8 13. c3 Qc7
14. h3 Bd7 15. Nbd4 a6 16. Bd3 Ng6 17. Qc2 Nf8 18. Nf5 Bxf5 19. Bxf5 h6 20.
Be3 Rad8 21. Rad1 Ne6 22. Qa4 Bf8 23. Qg4 g6 24. Bb1 h5 25. Qa4 Bg7 26. a3
d4 27. cxd4 Nexd4 28. Nxd4 Bxd4 29. Bxd4 Rxe1+ 30. Rxe1 Nxd4 31. Qb4 Rd6
32. Be4 b5 33. Kf1 Ne6 34. Bf3 Rd4 35. Qb3 Rd2 36. Rd1 Nd4 37. Qd5 Qh2 38.
Ke1 Rxb2 39. Qd8+ Kh7 0-1

Gilchrist is a legend wrote on 05/15/10 at 14:03:23:

Sic: "try". 

Alias wrote on 05/15/10 at 13:31:28:


Thanks, I corrected the number. I never claimed they were repertoire books (notice the comma in that sentence), but they are genuine attempts to be complete (for both sides), which was the relevant point.