Now that I've got the attention of every French player on this forum I have a question about this defense from the white perspective. How does the theory of 3.Nc3 compare to that of the Tarrasch? And which do you less like to face and/or have more trouble against?
Originally posted by YUG0slav ! please don't tell me that you're planning to ditch glorious Sicilian for the French?! Or maybe you just want to know how to deal with it as white...
Don't you read? I asked from the white perspective, I'm looking for ways to fight it, and I'm still using the Dragon.
Originally posted by cmsMaster Now that I've got the attention of every French player on this forum I have a question about this defense from the white perspective. How does the theory of 3.Nc3 compare to that of the Tarrasch? And which do you less like to face and/or have more trouble against?
There's more theory regarding Nc3, as black has several well-tested ways of meeting the move.
White more often gains the advantage with Nc3 than with Nd2, but there are reasons to advocate.
White immediately offers black equality with the exchange variation, but that's what I play as white.
Originally posted by cmsMaster Now that I've got the attention of every French player on this forum I have a question about this defense from the white perspective. How does the theory of 3.Nc3 compare to that of the Tarrasch? And which do you less like to face and/or have more trouble against?
3.Nc3 is putting more immediate pressure on black as a result of the knight's influence on the central squares d5 & e4. It's not a "better" move than 3.Nd2, just different in character. 3.Nd2 isn't putting any immediate pressure on black and the struggle in those games takes place in the middlegame.
Having said this, black has the option of turning either 3.Nc3 or 3.Nd2 into the same opening: 3....dxe4 defining the Rubinstein variation. This is probably the best choice for a beginner who wants to keep the preparation down to a minimum.
Originally posted by !~TONY~! I think Nc3 is definitely better than Nd2. Not to mention it just looks better, aesthetically.
I prefer the Tarrasch. It's not really a matter of 'better'. I just prefer the types of position you get out of it. I've never been happy with the doubled c-pawn positions you get out of the Winawer.
At the top level it's pretty common, and scores about the same.
Originally posted by Sicilian Smaug I think Kasparov and other GMs have said that Nc3 is good for a win and Nd2 good for a draw. But I don't believe that's true at all for our level.
1.e4 e6
2.d4 d5
3.Nc3
1-0?
do you think that is true at any level?
It makes chess a complete waste of time is such crass statements are correct
Why not simply
1.e4
1-0
lets play gothic chess instead
26 Oct '06 23:06
French Defense
Back to Top