French Defence

The French Defence is a chess opening characterised by the moves:

1. e4 e6

This is most commonly followed by 2.d4 d5. Black usually plays ...c5 soon after, attacking White's and gaining on the . The French has a reputation for solidity and resilience, although some lines such as the Winawer Variation can lead to complications. Black's position is often somewhat in the early game; in particular, the pawn on e6 can impede the of the bishop on c8, known by many players as the "French bishop".

History The French Defence is named after a match played by correspondence between the cities of London and Paris in 1834 (although earlier examples of games with the opening do exist). It was Jacques Chamouillet, one of the players of the Paris team, who persuaded the others to adopt this defence.Le Palamède edited by St. Amant (1846), p. 20.

Along with other openings besides 1.e4 e5, the French Defence received relatively little attention until the twentieth century. The first world chess champion Wilhelm Steinitz said "I have never in my life played the French Defence, which is the dullest of all openings". In the early 20th century, Géza Maróczy was perhaps the first world-class player to make it his primary weapon against 1.e4. For the last several decades, it has usually been the third most popular reply to 1.e4, behind only 1...c5 and 1...e5. It was even temporarily ranked above 1...e5 in frequency around 2006.

Historically important contributors to the theory of the defence include Mikhail Botvinnik, Viktor Korchnoi, Akiba Rubinstein, Aron Nimzowitsch, Tigran Petrosian, Lev Psakhis, Wolfgang Uhlmann, and Rafael Vaganian. More recently, its leading practitioners include Evgeny Bareev, Alexey Dreev, Mikhail Gurevich, Alexander Khalifman, Smbat Lputian, Alexander Morozevich, Teimour Radjabov, Nigel Short, Gata Kamsky, Ding Liren, and Yury Shulman.

The Exchange Variation was recommended by Howard Staunton in the 19th century,p. 369, Howard Staunton, The Chess-Player's Handbook, 1847, H. G. Bohn. but has been in decline ever since. In the early 1990s, Garry Kasparov briefly experimented with it before switching to 3.Nc3. Black's game is made much easier as his queen's bishop has been liberated. It has the reputation of giving immediate to Black due to the symmetrical pawn structure.

Like the Exchange, the Advance Variation was frequently played in the early days of the French Defence. Aron Nimzowitsch believed it to be White's best choice and enriched its theory with many ideas. The Advance declined in popularity, however, throughout most of the 20th century until it was revived in the 1980s by grandmaster (GM) and prominent opening theoretician Evgeny Sveshnikov, who continued to be a leading expert in this line. In recent years, it has become nearly as popular as 3.Nd2; GM Alexander Grischuk has championed it successfully at the highest levels. It is also a popular choice at the club level due to the availability of a simple, straightforward plan involving attacking chances and extra space.

Basics

Following the opening moves 1.e4 e6, the main line of the French Defence continues 2.d4 d5. White sets up a , which Black immediately challenges by attacking the pawn on e4. The same position can be reached by transposition from a Queen's Pawn Game after 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 or the declining of a Blackmar–Diemer Gambit after 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6.

White's options include defending the e4-pawn with 3.Nc3 or 3.Nd2, advancing it with 3.e5, or exchanging it with 3.exd5, each of which leads to different types of positions. Defending the pawn with 3.Bd3 allows 3...dxe4 4.Bxe4 Nf6, when Black gains either a tempo or the advantage of .

After 3.Nc3, played in over 40% of all games after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5, Black has three main options, treated separately: 3...Bb4 (the Winawer Variation), 3...Nf6 (the Classical Variation), and 3...dxe4 (the Rubinstein Variation).

General themes

The diagram shows a pawn structure commonly found in the French. Black has more space on the queenside, so tends to focus on that side of the board, almost always playing c7–c5 early on to attack White's pawn chain at its base, and may follow up by advancing the a- and b-pawns.

Alternatively or simultaneously, Black will play against White's centre, which is cramping Black's position. In the unlikely case that the flank attack c7–c5 is insufficient to achieve counterplay, Black can also try f7–f6. In many positions, White may support the pawn on e5 by playing f2–f4, with ideas of f4–f5, but the primary drawback to the advance of the f-pawn is opening of the g1–a7 diagonal, which is particularly significant due to the black queen's oft-found position on b6 and the heavy pressure on d4. In addition, many French Advance lines do not provide White with the time to play f2–f4 as it does not support the heavily pressured d4-pawn. For instance, 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.f4? (if White plays Nf3, f4 will come much slower) 5...Qb6 6.Nf3 Nh6! and the knight will go to f5 to place fatal pressure on d4 and dxc5 will never be an option as the white king would be stuck in the centre of the board after ...Bxc5.

White usually tries to exploit the extra space on the , often playing for a mating attack. White tries to do this in the Alekhine–Chatard Attack, for example. Another example is the following line of the Classical French: 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.f4 0-0 8.Nf3 c5 9.Bd3 (). White's eyes the weak h7-pawn, which is usually defended by a knight on f6, but here it has been pushed away by e5. If 9...cxd4 (Black does better with 9...f5 or 9...f6), White can play the Greek gift sacrifice 10.Bxh7+ Kxh7 11.Ng5+ Qxg5 12.fxg5 dxc3 13.Qh5+! where Black has three minor pieces for the queen, a slight material superiority, but has a vulnerable king and White has good attacking chances.

Apart from a piece attack, White may play for the advance of the kingside pawns (an especially common idea in the endgame), which usually involves f2–f4, g2–g4 and then f4–f5 to use the spatial advantage on that side of the board. A white pawn on f5 can be very strong as it may threaten to capture on e6 or advance to f6. Sometimes the h-pawn to h5 or h6 may also be effective. A modern idea is for White to gain space on the queenside by playing a2–a3 and b2–b4. If implemented successfully, this will further restrict Black's pieces.

One of the drawbacks of the French Defence for Black is the , which is blocked in by the pawn on e6 and can remain passive throughout the game. An often-cited example of the potential weakness of this bishop is Siegbert Tarrasch–Richard Teichmann, San Sebastián 1912, in which the diagrammed position was reached after fifteen moves of a Classical French.

Black's position is passive because the light-square bishop is hemmed in by pawns on a6, b5, d5, e6, and f7. White will probably try to exchange Black's knight, which is the only one of Black's pieces that has any scope. Although it might be possible for Black to hold on for a draw, it is not easy and, barring any mistakes by White, Black will have few chances to create counterplay.

Owing to this, for many years, the classical lines fell out of favour, and 3...Bb4 began to be seen more frequently after World War I, owing to the efforts of Aron Nimzowitsch and Mikhail Botvinnik. In Tarrasch–Teichmann, White won after 41 moves. In order to avoid this fate, Black usually makes it a priority early in the game to find a useful post for the bishop. Black can play ...Bd7–a4 to attack a pawn on c2, which occurs in many lines of the Winawer Variation. If Black's f-pawn has moved to f6, then Black may also consider bringing the bishop to g6 or h5 via d7 and e8. If White's light-square bishop is on the f1–a6 diagonal, Black can try to exchange it by playing ...b6 and ...Ba6, or ...Qb6 followed by ...Bd7–b5.

Classical Variation: 3.Nc3 Nf6

3.Nc3 Nf6 reaches a major system in the French. The position was seen as so normal that no one thought about claiming it. White's most common responses are 4.e5 (the Steinitz Variation) and 4.Bg5, pinning Black's knight to Black's queen. White threatens 5.e5, attacking the pinned knight; Black has a number of ways to meet this threat: 4...Be7, the classical continuation; 4...dxe4, the Burn Variation; and 4...Bb4, the McCutcheon Variation, which counterattacks rather than deal with the threat immediately.

Old main line: 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Bxe7 Qxe7

4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 used to be the main line of the French Defence, but the Burn Variation (4...dxe4) has overtaken 4...Be7 in popularity, 4.e5 is now comparably popular to 4.Bg5, and 6.h4 rivals 6.Bxe7 in frequency.

After 6.Bxe7 Qxe7, White's usual move is 7.f4, which was extremely rare in the 19th century (though played once by Wilhelm Steinitz), but became dominant during the 20th century. It typically continues 7...0-0 (not 7...c5? 8.Nb5!) 8.Nf3 c5 or 7...a6 8.Nf3 c5. White has a number of ninth move options, including (for both lines) 9.Bd3, 9.Qd2 and 9.dxc5.

White has the following common seventh-move alternatives: 7.Nb5, the Alapin Variation, was also played several times by Emanuel Lasker. The main reply is 7...Nb6. 7.Qd2, played by Akiba Rubinstein and Siegbert Tarrasch, typically continues with 7...a6 or 7...0-0; transposition to the 7.f4 line after 8.f4 and 9.Nf3 is very common. 7.Qg4 is the aggressive Pollock Variation; the most common reply is 7...0-0. 7.Bd3 is occasionally seen.

Alekhine–Chatard Attack: 6.h4

An alternative for White is the gambit 6.h4, which was devised by Adolf Albin and played by Chatard, but not taken seriously until the game Alekhine–Fahrni, Mannheim 1914. It is known today as the Albin–Chatard Attack or the Alekhine–Chatard Attack. Additional names are Chatard–Alekhine Attack, Albin Attack, and Alekhine Attack. After 6...Bxg5 7.hxg5 Qxg5 8.Nh3 Qe7 9.Qg4 g6 10.Ng5 (the reason for 8.Nh3 rather than 8.Nf3 is to play Qg4), White has sacrificed a pawn to keep the black king in the centre, as castling neither queenside nor kingside appears safe. Another point of the gambit is that Black's natural French Defence move 6...c5 runs into 7.Bxe7 when Black must either move the king with 7...Kxe7 or allow 7...Qxe7 8.Nb5! with a dual threat of Nc7+, winning the rook on a8, and Nd6+, when Black's king must move and the knight is very strong on d6. Black may decline the gambit in several ways such as 6...a6 and 6...h6. After 6...a6, White can continue to play for an attack with the aggressive 7.Qg4! threatening Bxe7 and then Qxg7. Black is forced to eliminate the bishop with 7...Bxg5 8.hxg5, opening up the h-file. A wild game with unsafe kings is sure to ensue. 6...h6 is a safer declination of the sacrifice, forcing the bishop to trade with 7.Bxe7 Qxe7 after which White may continue to try to attack on the kingside in anticipation of Black castling kingside (since queenside castling is undesirable due to the need for c5) with 8.f4 a6 9.g4 with a menacing attack.

Burn Variation: 4.Bg5 dxe4

Named after Amos Burn, the Burn Variation is the most common reply at the top level. After White's usual 5.Nxe4, the main line continues 5...Be7 6.Bxf6 Bxf6 7.Nf3 Nd7 (or 7...0-0), resulting in a position resembling those arising from the Rubinstein Variation. Here Black has the bishop pair, however, with greater dynamic chances (although White's knight is well placed on e4), so this line is more popular than the Rubinstein and has long been a favourite of Evgeny Bareev.

After 5...Be7 6.Bxf6, Black can also try 6...gxf6, as played by Alexander Morozevich and Gregory Kaidanov; by following up with ...f5 and ...Bf6, Black obtains active piece play in return for poor pawn structure.

An alternative line for Black that also resembles the Rubinstein begins with 5...Nbd7, continuing 6.Nf3 Be7 (6...h6 is also tried) 7.Nxf6+ Bxf6.

McCutcheon Variation: 4.Bg5 Bb4