The Exchange is in the third volume (and covers about 34 pages), according to the .pdf excerpt.

ReneDescartes wrote on 04/24/15 at 00:50:45:


I mean using what initiative you have, not to improve your position as a winning attempt, but to remove all the possibilities for your opponent to do so.

This game for example



Taking on d5 at move 15 and exchanging Queens at move 28 leads to a very sterile position.

HagenWatch1 wrote on 04/09/15 at 15:27:41:


I have found the Exchange variation with c4 a suitable weapon for playing for a win against players of a similar circa 2000 to 2100 standard. It can work below that rating as technique is not as good and above that in search of a draw if you are prepared to play "wasteland" chess. There is however one line or method of play where Black is able to liquidate all four of the c and d pawns, after which there's little left for either player.

Here's a win in under 20 moves

RdC wrote on 04/09/15 at 14:41:22:


Has the updated version of Moskolenko's "Flexible French" been released yet? Because I loved the original edition (I lost mine a while back) but I'm glad to hear an updated version is coming out. I can't wait to see if he offers new ideas in the French Exchange.

What worries me is that your assessment may be correct and that White does have a nagging initiative when choosing this variation. I was particularly irked when I read a comment describing Katerina Nemcova's victory against (I can't recall who) as White in the current US Women's Chess championship going on in St Louis when she chose to enter the French Exchange variation with the apparent intention to "avoid" her opponent's possible preparation in the French Defense. This comment concerns me because it suggests this is the way to defeat booked up opponents in the French. I was under the impression the French Exchange is hard to prove a draw if you're playing White. Because if that was true then everyone can simply go for the Exchange variation to put the French Defense to pasture.

What's really concerning to see in the current US Chess championship though is the news that two of the exponents of the French Defense suffered bad defeats using this opening. Looks like John Watson will have to do some post mortem analysis and explain what went wrong.

There is also a transposition from the English, often played by GM Normunds Miezis:
1.c4 e6 2.e4 d5 3.exd5 exd5 4.d4

The most obvious examples are 1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.e3 e5 4.Bxc4 exd4 5.exd4 (1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 exd5 4.c4 dxc4?! 5.Bxc4) and 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.d3 Nf6 6.d4 d5. I can't think of any other particularly relevant ones.

The first couple of things I think of are:  1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. ed ed 4. Nf3 Nf6 can also be reached via the Petroff, and 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. ed ed 4. c4 Nf6 5. Nc3 c6 can also be reached via the Winawer Counter-Gambit in the Slav.