Classical French

Technical questions regarding Openings, Middlegames, Endings etc.
soheil_hooshdaran
Posts: 2814
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm

Classical French

Post by soheil_hooshdaran » Wed Feb 03, 2016 9:41 pm

Hi.
Was I playing this variation wrongly all along?

Rybka gives a slight advantage to Black after ...Nxb4

Angus French
Posts: 1619
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 1:37 am
Contact:

Re: Classical French

Post by Angus French » Wed Feb 03, 2016 9:58 pm

You might like to try 5. Qh5.

User avatar
Carl Hibbard
Posts: 5741
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:05 pm
Location: Evesham

Re: Classical French

Post by Carl Hibbard » Wed Feb 03, 2016 10:00 pm

Angus French wrote:You might like to try 5. Qh5.
Yuk.
Cheers
Carl Hibbard

User avatar
Matt Mackenzie
Posts: 2902
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:51 pm
Location: Millom, Cumbria

Re: Classical French

Post by Matt Mackenzie » Wed Feb 03, 2016 10:11 pm

That is a long standing double edged line where Black gives up a piece for three (well placed) pawns.

IIRC theory used to think it a bit better for White, so the computer evaluation is of interest......
"Set up your attacks so that when the fire is out, it isn't out!" (H N Pillsbury)

soheil_hooshdaran
Posts: 2814
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm

Re: Classical French

Post by soheil_hooshdaran » Wed Feb 03, 2016 11:38 pm

What is liRC?

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 18197
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Classical French

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Feb 03, 2016 11:47 pm

soheil_hooshdaran wrote:What is liRC?
IIRC If I remember correctly.

I'm not sure of the objective soundness of the "Haldane Hack", Qh5 in a Classical, but I wouldn't risk playing the French to provoke it. I suspect you need a fine sense of cheapish tactics to make it work.

MartinCarpenter
Posts: 2454
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am

Re: Classical French

Post by MartinCarpenter » Thu Feb 04, 2016 9:36 am

As noted this is absolutely the main line for white, and not meant to work that well for black. As I remember, even significantly better for white in the end.

Not obvious of course, and there were quite a few reasonably high levels games in it first. I wouldn't trust the computer evaluation that much with this sort of unbalanced material. It'd take some titled player playing it persistently or something to make you wonder.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 18197
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Classical French

Post by Roger de Coverly » Thu Feb 04, 2016 10:27 am

MartinCarpenter wrote: I wouldn't trust the computer evaluation that much with this sort of unbalanced material.
Some brief experiments suggest that engine evaluations will vary with the choice of engine and how much search depth is allowed. Checking a database of Correspondence games showed results in White's favour.

John McKenna
Posts: 3724
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 2:02 pm

Re: Classical French

Post by John McKenna » Thu Feb 04, 2016 2:10 pm

IM Jack Rudd wrote:I myself would play 5.Nce2.
http://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewtopic.php ... ch#p157250
To find a for(u)m that accommodates the mess, that is the task of the artist now. (Samuel Beckett)

Nick Grey
Posts: 1167
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:16 am

Re: Classical French

Post by Nick Grey » Thu Feb 04, 2016 7:49 pm

Nice to know that Jack's preference is mine. Quite fashionable in early 1950s. Though it seems to me that stronger opponents are quite comfortable with this as black.

For my style of play, I ought to go for 5. Qh5. The Haldane Hack.

Early queen moves in the French to unbalance the position are fine. Not sure the engines/databases help with the Haldane Hack.

Helps immensely to be able to discuss with chess players especially those playing this line in the late 1960s/early 70s.

User avatar
Joey Stewart
Posts: 1087
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:35 pm
Location: All Of Them
Contact:

Re: Classical French

Post by Joey Stewart » Fri Feb 05, 2016 3:35 pm

I prefer 3. exd5 - french players will hate you for ruining all their theory and you get a nice comfortable easy game as white without having to memorise tons of razor sharp stuff.
Lose one queen and it is a disaster, Lose 1000 queens and it is just a statistic.

MartinCarpenter
Posts: 2454
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am

Re: Classical French

Post by MartinCarpenter » Fri Feb 05, 2016 3:58 pm

I'd generally be a bit rude about this, but when every other high level Berlin game seems to have turned into an Exchange French.....

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 18197
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Classical French

Post by Roger de Coverly » Fri Feb 05, 2016 4:17 pm

Joey Stewart wrote:I prefer 3. exd5 - french players will hate you for ruining all their theory
Authors are almost always disparaging to the Exchange French. It's good for those of us who play it as a winning weapon, as our opponents may underestimate their potential problems.

User avatar
Joey Stewart
Posts: 1087
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:35 pm
Location: All Of Them
Contact:

Re: Classical French

Post by Joey Stewart » Fri Feb 05, 2016 4:32 pm

I think they hope to deter white from using it as a system, but it can lead to some very interesting double edged positions as well if both sides continue to play for a win.

In my experiences of french defence books, the authors tend to have one or two variations in which they have had crushing wins as black and therefore dedicate most space to those lines, skimming over other white attempts as being inferior (i.e. black cannot get great positions against them) .
Lose one queen and it is a disaster, Lose 1000 queens and it is just a statistic.

Brian Towers
Posts: 1228
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2014 7:23 pm

Re: Classical French

Post by Brian Towers » Fri Feb 05, 2016 10:18 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:Authors are almost always disparaging to the Exchange French. It's good for those of us who play it as a winning weapon, as our opponents may underestimate their potential problems.
Come on, it's a bit of a passion killer and gives black complete equality. The one thing going for it for white is that it does lead to positions that are likely completely alien for the average French Defence player.
Ah, but I was so much older then. I'm younger than that now.

Post Reply