Not so old  example of Rubinstein with g3, here:
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=7410

I believe it's time for Black to review all systems vs different White sublines

Vass wrote on 07/27/11 at 07:42:37:


The Rubinstein can feel +/= until White actually tries to do something.  It has the virtue of solidity, even more than the "ordinary" French lines with e4-e5.  I wouldn't let some +/= evaluations scare you off, necessarily, even if they're strong player evaluations rather than computer evaluations (which should be considered but not followed).  You're playing Black, after all, and +/= isn't 1-0.

The reason I think the Bc8 is an easier problem in the Rubinstein is that after b7-b6 or a7-a6 and b7-b5, the bishop on b7 has an open diagonal, rather than still being very bad as it often is there in the "ordinary" French.  Purely to illustrate, think of this as a plan for Black:

1. I will castle, placing my knights on f6 and d7 and my f8 Bishop on e7.
2. I will play c7-c5 and exchange pawns.
3. I will play b6 and Bb7.
4a. If there is a pawn on d4, I will exchange pieces and control the d5 square.
4b. If there is no pawn on d4, I will advance my e and f pawns to restrict White's pieces.

That's how the Rubinstein can play if White is passive (or just goes wrong somewhere).  You can't do all of that in order if White is paying attention, and shouldn't get it all in at all.  But you shouldn't think of the Rubinstein as prospectless; you can instead think of it, as I do, as a Sicilian Defense where Black played d7-d5 first, then c7-c5, rather than the other way around (almost like the comparison between a Leningrad Dutch (f7-f5 first) to the King's Indian (e7-e5 first).

Below the GM level, this variation has perfectly decent winning chances, based on the same basic concept as the Sicilian: Arguing that after exchanging c and d pawns for e and d pawns, Black has a positional edge.

[End useless generalizations typed solely for the purpose of improving morale.]

Thanks gentlemen.
I like the French because of a fair amount of structure and solidity. The Winawer simply doesn't appeal to me and the classical just seems sooooo theory heavy. I'd like to play the Rubinstein lines and see what I can do in a "slower", more positional position.

Thanks again!
-Ted

My main source for this is Lev Psakhis' French Defense: Steinitz, Classical and Other Systems (2004).

Psakhis is one of the most respected experts on the French and he does a really good job of explaining the various options. He devotes two chapters to the Rubinstein and three to the Burn (1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 de4), which has many points of transposition.

My main problem with Psakhis' The Complete French, which also deals with the Rubinstein,
was that the typeface was too dense to figure out what variations he was discussing. This book is similarly dense, but a bit easier to follow because he uses bold font more liberally. 

My first source for these lines was Tim Harding's The Classical French. It's adequate for a general overview, but there have been quite a few developments since that was published (late 1980s or early 1990s. I don't feel like looking it up at the moment.)

I have the Steffen Pedersen book on "The Main line French 3. Nc3".  It's a bit dated now, but it is a reasonable resource on the Rubinstein, which will have seen theoretical developments since publication but probably does not require most amateurs taking up the opening to know each one.

The nice thing about the Rubinstein is that you only have to learn the one structure, because you have the same system against 3.Nd2 and 3.Nc3.  One thing to keep in mind is that the Bc8 is still a problem piece; ...dxe4 doesn't solve this problem, although it probably makes it easier to solve.

The book "Action Chess" by Purdy is collection of articles with an easy to learn opening repertoire. I don't agree with his choice of a quiet, positional, "safe" repertoire as the way to go for beginners, which is what he was recommending, but it's still well written. His recommendation against 1. e4 was the Rubinstein French with 4. ... Be7 instead of the 4. ... Bd7 of the Fort Knox. Even though it's old, if you're really that interested in the Rubinstein, it should be worth checking out.

Folks,

Are there any books or other resources that you can recommend with regards to the Rubinstein Variation/s?
I'd like to kc3 and or kd2 with dxe. I've read through the Fort Knox info in McDonald's How to Play against 1 e4, but I'd like a look at some other ideas . . . Any suggestions would be very much appreciated.

Thanks!
-Ted