French Defence

The French Defence is a chess opening characterised by the

moves: French Defence
a b c d e f g h
1. e4 e6
8 8
This is most commonly followed by 2.d4 d5, with Black 7 7
intending ...c5 at a later stage, attacking White's pawn centre
6 6
and gaining space on the queenside. The French has a
reputation for solidity and resilience, although some lines such 5 5
as the Winawer Variation can lead to sharp complications. 4 4
Black's position is often somewhat cramped in the early game.
In particular, the pawn on e6 can impede the development of 3 3

the bishop on c8. 2 2

1 1

a b c d e f g h
Contents
Moves 1.e4 e6
Basics
ECO C00–C19
General themes
Named London vs. Paris
Main line: 2.d4 d5
after correspondence match (1834–
3.Nc3
1836)[1]
Winawer Variation: 3...Bb4
Sidelines Parent King's Pawn Game
Classical Variation: 3...Nf6
4.Bg5
4.e5
Rubinstein Variation: 3...dxe4
Rare sidelines after 3.Nc3
Tarrasch Variation: 3.Nd2
Advance Variation: 3.e5
Exchange Variation: 3.exd5 exd5
Early deviations for White
Early deviations for Black
History
ECO codes
See also
References
Further reading
External links
Basics
Following the opening moves 1.e4 e6, the main line of the French a b c d e f g h
Defence continues 2.d4 d5 (see below for alternatives). White sets 8 8
up a pawn centre, which Black immediately challenges by attacking 7 7
the pawn on e4. The same position can be reached by transposition
6 6
from a Queen's Pawn Game after 1.d4 e6 2.e4 d5 or the declining
5 5
of a Blackmar–Diemer Gambit after 1.d4 d5 2.e4 e6.
4 4
White's options include defending the e4-pawn with 3.Nc3 or 3 3
3.Nd2, exchanging it with 3.exd5, or advancing it with 3.e5, each 2 2
of which leads to different types of positions. Defending the pawn
1 1
with 3.Bd3 allows 3...dxe4 4.Bxe4 Nf6, when Black gains either a
a b c d e f g h
tempo or the advantage of the two bishops.
Position after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5

General themes
a b c d e f g h The diagram shows a pawn structure commonly found in the
8 8 French. Black has more space on the queenside, so tends to focus
7 7
on that side of the board, almost always playing ...c7–c5 at some
point to attack White's pawn chain at its base, and may follow up by
6 6
advancing his a- and b-pawns.
5 5
4 4 Alternatively or
a b c d e f g h
3 3 simultaneously, Black will
8 8
2 2 play against White's centre,
1 1
which is cramping his 7 7
position. In the unlikely case 6 6
a b c d e f g h
that the flank attack ...c7–c5 5 5
Typical pawn structure
is insufficient to achieve 4 4
counterplay, Black can also
3 3
try ...f7–f6. In many
2 2
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- 1 1
pawn is opening of the g1-a7 diagonal, which is particularly a b c d e f g h
significant due to the black queen's oft-found position on b6 and the
heavy pressure on d4. In addition, many French Advance variations Position after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5
do not provide white with the time to play f2-f4 as it does not 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.f4 Qb6
support the heavily pressured d4 pawn. For instance, 1.e4 e6 2.d4 6.Nf3 Nh6
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 come to f5 to place
fatal pressure on d4 and dxc5 will never be an option for white as
the white king would be stuck in the center of the board after Bxc5.

White usually tries to exploit his extra space on the kingside, where he will often play 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 (see diagram). White's light-square bishop 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+
a b c d e f g h
Qxg5! 12.fxg5 dxc3 13.Qh5+! where Black has three minor pieces
8 8
for the queen, which gives him a slight material superiority, but his
king is vulnerable and White has good attacking chances. 7 7
6 6
Apart from a piece attack, White may play for the advance of his 5 5
kingside pawns (an especially common idea in the endgame), which
4 4
usually involves f2–f4, g2–g4 and then f4–f5 to use his natural
3 3
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. 2 2
Sometimes pushing the h-pawn to h5 or h6 may also be effective. A 1 1
modern idea is for White to gain space on the queenside by playing a b c d e f g h
a2–a3 and b2–b4. If implemented successfully, this will further Position after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5
restrict Black's pieces. 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7
6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.f4 0-0 8.Nf3 c5
One of the drawbacks of the 9.Bd3
Tarrasch vs. Teichmann, 1912
French Defence for Black is
a b c d e f g h
his queen's bishop, which is
8 8 blocked in by his pawn on e6 and can remain passive throughout
7 7 the game. An often-cited example of the potential weakness of this
6 6 bishop is S. Tarrasch–R. Teichmann, San Sebastián 1912, in which
5 5 the diagrammed position was reached after fifteen moves of a
4 4
Classical French.
3 3
Black's position is passive because his light-square bishop is
2 2 hemmed in by pawns on a6, b5, d5, e6 and f7. White will probably
1 1 try to exchange Black's knight, which is the only one of his pieces
a b c d e f g h that has any scope. Although it might be possible for Black to hold
Position after 15...Nxc5 on for a draw, it is not easy and, barring any mistakes by White,
Black will have few chances to create counterplay; this is why, 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 Nimzowitsch and 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.

Main line: 2.d4 d5

3.Nc3

Played in over 40% of all games after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5, 3. Nc3 is the most commonly seen line against the
French. Black has three main options, 3...Bb4 (the Winawer Variation), 3...Nf6 (the Classical
Variation), and 3...dxe4 (the Rubinstein Variation). An eccentric idea is 3...Nc6!? 4.Nf3 Nf6 with the
idea of 5.e5 Ne4; German IM Helmut Reefschlaeger has been fond of this move.

Winawer Variation: 3...Bb4

This variation, named after Szymon Winawer and pioneered by Nimzowitsch and Botvinnik, is one of the
main systems in the French, due chiefly to the latter's efforts in the 1940s, becoming the most often seen
rejoinder to 3.Nc3, though in the 1980s, the Classical Variation with 3...Nf6 began a revival, and has since
become more popular.

3... Bb4 pins the knight on c3, forcing White to resolve the
a b c d e f g h
central tension. White normally clarifies the central situation for
the moment with 4. e5, gaining space and hoping to show that 8 8
Black's b4-bishop is misplaced. The main line then is: 4... c5 5. 7 7
a3 Bxc3+ 6. bxc3, resulting in the diagrammed position.
6 6

While White has doubled pawns on the queenside, which form 5 5

the basis for Black's counterplay, they can also help White 4 4
since they strengthen his centre and give him a semi-open b-
file. White has a spatial advantage on the kingside, where 3 3
Black is even weaker than usual because he has traded off his 2 2
dark-square bishop. Combined with the bishop pair, this gives
1 1
White attacking chances, which he must attempt to use as the
a b c d e f g h
long-term features of this pawn structure favour Black.
Winawer Variation after 3...Bb4 4.e5 c5
In the diagrammed position, Black most frequently plays 6... 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3
Ne7 (The main alternative is 6...Qc7, which can simply
transpose to main lines after 7.Qg4 Ne7, but Black also has the
option of 7.Qg4 f5 or ...f6. 6...Qa5 has recently become a popular alternative). Now White can exploit the
absence of Black's dark-square bishop by playing 7. Qg4, giving Black two choices: he may sacrifice his
kingside pawns with 7...Qc7 8.Qxg7 Rg8 9.Qxh7 cxd4 but destroy White's centre in return, the so-called
"Poisoned Pawn Variation"; or he can play 7...0-0 8.Bd3 Nbc6, which avoids giving up material, but
leaves the king on the flank where White is trying to attack. Experts on the 7.Qg4 line include Judit Polgár.

If the tactical complications of 7.Qg4 are not to White's taste, 7.Nf3 and 7.a4 are good positional
alternatives, and 7.h4 is a more aggressive attempt:

7. Nf3 is a natural developing move, and White usually follows it up by developing the king's bishop to d3
or e2 (occasionally to b5) and castling kingside. This is called the Winawer Advance Variation. This line
often continues 7... Bd7 8. Bd3 c4 9. Be2 Ba4 10. 0-0 Qa5 11. Bd2 Nbc6 12. Ng5 h6 13. Nh3 0-0-0. Its
assessment is unclear, but most likely Black would be considered "comfortable" here.

The purpose behind 7. a4 is threefold: it prepares Bc1–a3, taking advantage of the absence of Black's dark-
square bishop. It also prevents Black from playing ...Qa5–a4 or ...Bd7–a4 attacking c2, and if Black plays
...b6 (followed by ...Ba6 to trade off the bad bishop), White may play a5 to attack the b6-pawn. World
Champions Vasily Smyslov and Bobby Fischer both used this line with success.

White also has 7. h4, which has the ideas of either pushing this pawn to h6 to cause more dark-square
weaknesses in the Black kingside (if Black meets h5 with ...h6, White can play g4-g5), or getting the rook
into the game via Rh3–g3.

Black can also gain attacking chances in most lines: against 7.Qg4, Black will attack White's king in the
center; whereas against the other lines, Black can often gain an attack with ...0-0-0, normally combined
with ...c4 to close the queenside, and then ...f6 to open up the kingside, where White's king often resides. If
Black can accomplish this, White is often left without meaningful play, although ...c4 does permit White a4
followed by Ba3 if Black has not stopped this by placing a piece on a4 (for example, by Bd7–a4).

Sidelines
5th move deviations for White include:

5.Qg4
5.dxc5
5.Nf3
5.Bd2

4th move deviations for White include:

4.exd5 exd5, transposing to a line of the Exchange Variation, where White may aim to prove
that Black's bishop on b4 is misplaced.
4.Ne2 (the Alekhine Gambit) 4...dxe4 5.a3 Be7 (5...Bxc3+ is necessary if Black wants to try
to hold the pawn) 6.Nxe4 to prevent Black from doubling his pawns.
4.Bd3 defending e4.
4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 dxe4 6.Qg4, another attempt to exploit Black's weakness on g7.
4.e5 c5 5.Bd2, again preventing the doubled pawns and making possible 6.Nb5, where the
knight may hop into d6 or simply defend d4.
4.Bd2 (an old move sometimes played by Rashid Nezhmetdinov, notably against Mikhail
Tal)

Deviations for Black include:

4...Ne7 although this move usually transposes to the main line.

4...b6 followed by ...Ba6, or 4...Qd7 with the idea of meeting 5.Qg4 with 5...f5. However,
theory currently prefers White's chances in both lines.
Another popular way for Black to deviate is 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Ba5, the Armenian Variation, as its
theory and practice have been much enriched by players from that country, the most notable
of whom is Rafael Vaganian. Black maintains the pin on the knight, which White usually tries
to break by playing 6.b4 cxb4 7.Qg4 or 7.Nb5 (usually 7.Nb5 bxa3+ 8.c3 Bc7 9.Bxa3 and
White has the upper hand).

Classical Variation: 3...Nf6

This is another major system in the French. White can continue with the following options:

4.Bg5

White threatens 5.e5, attacking the pinned knight. Black has a number of ways to meet this threat:

The Burn Variation, named after Amos Burn, is the most common reply at the top level: 4...
dxe4 5. Nxe4 and usually there now follows: 5... Be7 6. Bxf6 Bxf6 7. Nf3 Nd7 or 7... 0-0,
resulting in a position resembling those arising from the Rubinstein Variation. However, here
Black has the bishop pair, 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. Black can also try 5...Be7 6.Bxf6 gxf6, as played by Alexander
Morozevich and Gregory Kaidanov; by following up with ...f5 and ...Bf6, Black obtains active
piece play in return for his shattered pawn structure. Another line that resembles the
Rubinstein is 5...Nbd7 6.Nf3 Be7 (6...h6 is also tried) 7. Nxf6+ Bxf6.

4... Be7 5. e5 Nfd7 used to be the main line and remains important, even though the Burn
Variation has overtaken it in popularity.
 The usual continuation is 6. Bxe7 Qxe7 7. f4 0-0
a b c d e f g h
(not 7... c5? 8. Nb5!) 8. Nf3 c5, when White has a
number of options, including 9.Bd3, 9.Qd2 and 8 8
9.dxc5. 7 7
An alternative for White is the gambit 6. h4,
6 6
which was devised by Adolf Albin and played by
Chatard, but not taken seriously until the game 5 5
Alekhine–Fahrni, Mannheim 1914. It is known 4 4
today as the Albin–Chatard Attack or the
Alekhine–Chatard Attack. After 6... Bxg5 7. 3 3
hxg5 Qxg5 8. Nh3 Qe7 9. Qg4 g6 10. Ng5 (the 2 2
reason for 8.Nh3 rather than 8.Nf3 is to play
Qg4), White has sacrificed a pawn to keep the 1 1
black king in the center, as castling neither a b c d e f g h
queenside nor kingside appears safe. Another Classical Variation after 3...Nf6 4.Bg5
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
a b c d e f g h
allow 7... Qxe7 8. Nb5! with a dual threat of
Nc7+, winning the rook on a8, and Nd6+, when 8 8
Black's king must move and the knight is very 7 7
strong on d6. Black may decline the gambit in
6 6
several ways such as 6... a6 and 6... h6. After
6...a6, white can continue to play for an attack 5 5
with the aggressive 7. Qg4! threatening Bxe7
4 4
and then Qxg7. Black is forced to eliminate the
bishop with 7... Bxg5 8. hxg5, opening up the h- 3 3
file. A wild game with unsafe kings is sure to 2 2
ensue. 6... h6 is a safer declination of the
sacrifice, forcing the bishop to trade with 7.Bxe7 1 1
Qxe7 after which white may continue to try to a b c d e f g h
attack on the kingside in anticipation of black Alekhine-Chatard Attack Declined, White
castling kingside (since queenside castling is forces an attack after 6... h6 7.Bxe7
undesirable due to the need for c5) with 8. f4 a6 Qxe7 8. f4 a6 9. g4
9. g4 with a menacing attack.
A third choice for Black is to counterattack with the
McCutcheon Variation. In this variation, the second player ignores White's threat of e4–e5
and instead plays 4... Bb4. The main line continues: 5. e5 h6 6. Bd2 Bxc3 7. bxc3 Ne4 8.
Qg4. At this point Black may play 8...g6, which weakens the kingside dark squares but
keeps the option of castling queenside, or 8...Kf8. An alternative way white can treat 5...h6 is
to carry through with the threat with 6. exf6 hxg5 7.fxg7 Rg8. The McCutcheon Variation is
named for John Lindsay McCutcheon of Philadelphia (1857–1905), who brought the
variation to public attention when he used it to defeat World Champion Steinitz in a
simultaneous exhibition in Manhattan in 1885.[2][3][4]

4.e5

The Steinitz Variation, named after Wilhelm Steinitz, continues with 4. e5 Nfd7. Here 5.Nce2, the
Shirov–Anand Variation, prepares to bolster the white pawn centre with c2–c3 and f2–f4; while 5.Nf3
transposes to a position also reached via the Two Knights Variation (2.Nf3 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.d4).
The main line of the Steinitz is 5. f4 c5 6. Nf3 Nc6 7. Be3. (Instead 7.Ne2 transposes to the Shirov–Anand
Variation, while 7.Be2? cxd4 8.Nxd4 Ndxe5! 9.fxe5 Qh4+ wins a pawn for Black.) Here Black may step
up the pressure on d4 by playing 7...Qb6 or 7...cxd4 8.Nxd4 Qb6, begin queenside play with 7...a6 8.Qd2
b5, or continue kingside development by playing 7...Be7 or
a b c d e f g h
7...cxd4 8.Nxd4 Bc5. In these lines, White has the option of
playing either Qd2 and 0-0-0, or Be2 and 0-0, with the former 8 8
typically leading to sharper positions due to opposite-side 7 7
castling when Black castles kingside in both cases.
6 6

5 5

4 4

3 3

2 2

1 1
a b c d e f g h
Steinitz Variation after 4.e5 Nfd7

Rubinstein Variation: 3...dxe4

This variation is named after Akiba Rubinstein and can also a b c d e f g h

arise from a different move order: 3.Nd2 dxe4. White has freer 8 8
development and more space in the centre, which Black 7 7
intends to neutralise by playing ...c7–c5 at some point. This
6 6
solid line has undergone a modest revival, featuring in many
GM games as a drawing weapon but theory still gives White a 5 5
slight edge. After 3... dxe4 4. Nxe4, Black has the following
4 4
options:
3 3
The most popular line is: 4...Nd7 5.Nf3 Ngf6 6.Nxf6+ 2 2
Nxf6 when Black is ready for ...c5.
1 1
4...Bd7 5.Nf3 Bc6 (the Fort Knox Variation)
activating the light-square bishop, which is often a b c d e f g h
played by Alexander Rustemov. Rubinstein Variation after 3...dxe4
4.Nxe4

Rare sidelines after 3.Nc3

One rare sideline after 3.Nc3 is 3...c6, which is known as the Paulsen Variation, after Louis Paulsen. It can
also be reached via a Caro-Kann Defence move-order (1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 e6).

Another rare sideline after 3.Nc3 is 3...Nc6, which was played by Aron Nimzowitsch.

Tarrasch Variation: 3.Nd2

The Tarrasch Variation is named after Siegbert Tarrasch. This move became particularly popular during
the 1970s and early 1980s when Anatoly Karpov used it to great effect. Though less aggressive than the
alternate 3.Nc3, it is still used by top-level players seeking a small, safe advantage.
Like 3.Nc3, 3.Nd2 protects e4, but is different in several key
a b c d e f g h
respects: it does not block White's c-pawn from advancing,
which means he can play c3 at some point to support his d4- 8 8
pawn. Hence, it avoids the Winawer Variation as 3...Bb4 is 7 7
now readily answered by 4.c3. On the other hand, 3.Nd2
6 6
develops the knight to an arguably less active square than
3.Nc3, and in addition, it hems in White's dark-square bishop. 5 5
Hence, White will typically have to spend an extra tempo 4 4
moving the knight from d2 at some point before developing
3 3
said bishop.
2 2
3... c5 4. exd5 and now Black has two ways to
1 1
recapture:
a b c d e f g h
4... exd5 was a staple of many old Karpov– Tarrasch Variation after 3.Nd2 Nf6
Korchnoi battles, including seven games in their
1974 match. It usually leads to Black having an
isolated queen's pawn (see isolated pawn). The main line continues 5.Ngf3 Nc6 6.Bb5
Bd6 7.0-0 Nge7 8.dxc5 Bxc5 9.Nb3 Bb6 with a position where, if White can neutralise
the activity of Black's pieces in the middlegame, he will have a slight advantage in the
ending. Another possibility for White is 5.Bb5+ Bd7 (5...Nc6 is also possible) 6.Qe2+
Be7 7.dxc5 to trade off the bishops and make it more difficult for Black to regain the
pawn.
4... Qxd5 is an important alternative for Black; the idea is to trade his c- and d-pawns for
White's d- and e-pawns, leaving Black with an extra centre pawn. This constitutes a
slight structural advantage, but in return White gains time for development by harassing
Black's queen. This interplay of static and dynamic advantages is the reason why this
line has become popular in the last decade. Play usually continues 5.Ngf3 cxd4 6.Bc4
Qd6 7.0-0 Nf6 (preventing 8.Ne4) 8.Nb3 Nc6 9.Nbxd4 Nxd4, and here White may stay in
the middlegame with 10.Nxd4 or offer the trade of queens with 10.Qxd4, with the former
far more commonly played today.
3... Nf6 While the objective of 3...c5 was to break open the centre, 3... Nf6 aims to close it.
After 4. e5 Nfd7 5. Bd3 c5 6. c3 Nc6 (6...b6 intends ...Ba6 next to get rid of Black's "bad"
light-square bishop, a recurring idea in the French) 7. Ne2 (leaving f3 open for the queen's
knight) 7... cxd4 8. cxd4 f6 9. exf6 Nxf6 10. Nf3 Bd6 Black has freed his pieces at the cost
of having a backward pawn on e6. White may also choose to preserve his pawn on e5 by
playing 4.e5 Nfd7 5.c3 c5 6.f4 Nc6 7.Ndf3, but his development is slowed as a result, and
Black will gain dynamic chances if he can open the position to advantage.
3... Nc6 is known as the Guimard Variation: after 4.Ngf3 Nf6 5.e5 Nd7 Black will exchange
White's cramping e-pawn next move by ...f6. However, Black does not exert any pressure on
d4 because he cannot play ...c5, so White should maintain a slight advantage, with 6.Be2 or
6 Nb3.
3... Be7 is known as the Morozevich Variation.[5] A fashionable line among top GMs in
recent years, this odd-looking move aims to prove that every White move now has its
drawbacks, e.g. after 4.Ngf3 Nf6 5.e5 Nfd7 White cannot play f4, whereas 4.Bd3 c5 5.dxc5
Nf6 and 4.e5 c5 5. Qg4 Kf8!? lead to obscure complications. 3...h6?!, with a similar rationale,
has also gained some adventurous followers in recent years, including GM Alexander
Morozevich.
Another rare line is 3... a6, which gained some popularity in the 1970s. Similar to 3...Be7, the
idea is to play a waiting move to make White declare his intentions before Black commits to
a plan of his own. 3...a6 also controls the b5-square, which is typically useful for Black in
most French lines because, for example, White no longer has the option of playing Bb5.
Advance Variation: 3.e5

The main line of the Advance Variation continues 3... c5 4. c3 a b c d e f g h

Nc6 5. Nf3 and then we have a branching point: 8 8

7 7
5... Qb6, the idea is to increase the pressure on d4
and eventually undermine the white centre. The 6 6
queen also attacks the b2-square, so White's dark- 5 5
square bishop cannot easily defend the d4-pawn
without losing the b2-pawn. White's most common 4 4
replies are 6.a3 and 6.Be2. 3 3

6.a3 is currently the most important line in the 2 2

Advance: it prepares 7.b4, gaining space on the 1 1
queenside. Black may prevent this with 6...c4
a b c d e f g h
intending to take en passant if White plays b4,
which creates a closed game where Black fights Advance Variation after 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6
for control of the b3-square. On the other hand, 5.Nf3
Black may continue developing with 6...Nh6,
intending ...Nf5, which might seem strange as
White can double the pawn with Bxh6, but this is actually considered good for Black.
Black plays ...Bg7 and ...0-0 and Black's king has adequate defence and White will miss
his apparently 'bad' dark-square bishop.
6.Be2 is the other alternative, aiming simply to castle. Once again, a common Black
response is 6...Nh6 intending 7...cxd4 8.cxd4 Nf5 attacking d4. White usually responds
to this threat with 7.Bxh6 or 7.b3 preparing Bb2.
6.Bd3 cxd4 7.cxd4 Bd7 (7...Nxd4?? 8.Nxd4 Qxd4 9.Bb5+) 8.0-0 Nxd4 9.Nxd4 Qxd4
10.Nc3 is the Milner-Barry Gambit. If Black continues 10...Qxe5, White gains an attack
with 11.Re1 Qb8 12.Nxd5 or 11...Qd6 12.Nb5.[6]
5... Bd7 was mentioned by Greco as early as 1620. It is known as the Euwe variation[7] and
was popularised by Viktor Korchnoi in the 1970s. Now a main line, the idea behind the
move is that since Black usually plays ...Bd7 eventually, he plays it at once and waits for
White to show his hand. If White continues 6.a3, modern theory says that Black at least
equalises after 6...f6! The lines are complex, but the main point is that a3 is a wasted move if
the black queen is not on b6 and so Black uses the extra tempo to attack White's centre
immediately. Common continuations after 5...Bd7 are 6.Be2 or 6.dxc5 (6.Bb5? is
immediately refuted by 6...Nxe5).
5... Nh6 has recently become a popular alternative; the idea is that 6.Bxh6 gxh6 gains Black
a semi-open g-file to attack the White king, or Black can play ...Bg7 to support ...f6 to attack
White's pawn on e5. If White doesn't take the knight, it will move to f5 to pressure d4, or (after
...f6) to f7 to pressure e5.

There are alternative strategies to 3... c5 that were tried in the early 20th century such as 3...b6, intending to
fianchetto the bad bishop and which can transpose to Owen's Defence or 3...Nc6, played by Carlos
Guimard, intending to keep the bad bishop on c8 or d7 which is passive and obtains little counterplay.
Also, 4...Qb6 5.Nf3 Bd7 intending 6...Bb5 to trade off the "bad" queen's bishop is possible.

Exchange Variation: 3.exd5 exd5

Many players who begin with 1.e4 find that the French Defence is the most difficult opening for them to
play against due to the closed structure and unique strategies of the system. Thus, many players choose to
play the exchange so that the position becomes simple and clearcut. White makes no effort to exploit the
advantage of the first move, and has often chosen this line with
a b c d e f g h
expectation of an early draw, and indeed draws often occur if
neither side breaks the symmetry. An extreme example was 8 8
Capablanca–Maróczy, Lake Hopatcong 1926, which went: 7 7
4.Bd3 Bd6 5.Nf3 Nf6 6.0-0 0-0 7.Bg5 Bg4 8.Re1 Nbd7
6 6
9.Nbd2 c6 10.c3 Qc7 11.Qc2 Rfe8 12.Bh4 Bh5 13.Bg3 Bxg3
14.hxg3 Bg6 15.Rxe8+ Rxe8 16.Bxg6 hxg6 17.Re1 Rxe1+ 5 5
18.Nxe1 Ne8 19.Nd3 Nd6 20.Qb3 a6 21.Kf1 ½–½.[8] 4 4

Despite the symmetrical pawn structure, White cannot force a 3 3

draw. An obsession with obtaining one sometimes results in 2 2

embarrassment for White, as in Tatai–Korchnoi, Beer Sheva
1 1
1978, which continued 4.Bd3 c5!? 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.Qe2+ Be7
a b c d e f g h
7.dxc5 Nf6 8.h3 0-0 9.0-0 Bxc5 10.c3 Re8 11.Qc2 Qd6
12.Nbd2 Qg3 13.Bf5 Re2 14.Nd4 Nxd4 0–1.[9] A less Exchange Variation after 3.exd5 exd5
extreme example was Mikhail Gurevich–Short, Manila 1990
where White, a strong Russian grandmaster, played openly for
the draw but was ground down by Short in 42 moves.[10]

To create genuine winning chances, White will often play c2–c4 at some stage to put pressure on Black's
d5-pawn. Black can give White an isolated queen's pawn by capturing on c4, but this gives White's pieces
greater freedom, which may lead to attacking chances. This occurs in lines such as 3.exd5 exd5 4.c4
(played by GMs Normunds Miezis and Maurice Ashley) and 4.Nf3 Bd6 5.c4, which may transpose to the
Petroff. Conversely, if White declines to do this, Black may play ...c7–c5 himself, e.g. 4.Bd3 c5, as in the
above-cited Tatai–Korchnoi game.

If c2–c4 is not played, White and Black have two main piece setups. White may put his pieces on Nf3,
Bd3, Bg5 (pinning the black knight), Nc3, Qd2 or the queen's knight can go to d2 instead and White can
support the centre with c3 and perhaps play Qb3. Conversely, when the queen's knight is on c3, the king's
knight may go to e2 when the enemy bishop and knight can be kept out of the key squares e4 and g4 by f3.
When the knight is on c3 in the first and last of the above strategies, White may choose either short or long
castling. The positions are so symmetrical that the options and strategies are the same for both sides.

Another way to unbalance the position is for White or Black to castle on opposite sides of the board. An
example of this is the line 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.c3 Bd6 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.0-0 Nge7 8.Re1 Qd7 9.Nbd2 0-0-0.

Early deviations for White

After 1.e4 e6, almost 90 percent of all games continue 2.d4 d5, but White can try other ideas. The most
important of these is 2.d3 d5 3.Nd2, with a version of the King's Indian Attack. White will likely play
Ngf3, g3, Bg2, 0-0, c3 and/or Re1 in some order on the next few moves. Black has several ways to combat
this setup: 3...c5 followed by ...Nc6, ...Bd6, ...Nf6 or ...Nge7 and ...0-0 is common, 3...Nf6 4.Ngf3 Nc6
plans ...dxe4 and ...e5 to block in the Bg2, and 3...Nf6 4.Ngf3 b6 makes ...Ba6 possible if White's light-
square bishop leaves the a6–f1 diagonal. 2.d3 has been used by many leading players over the years,
including GMs Pal Benko, Bobby Fischer and Lev Psakhis.

2.f4 is the Labourdonnais Variation, named after Louis-Charles Mahé de La Bourdonnais,

the 19th-century French master.[11] Play can continue 2...d5 3. e5 c5 4. Nf3 Nc6 5.c3 Nge7
6.Na3 Nf5.
2.Qe2 is the Chigorin Variation, which discourages 2...d5 because after 3.exd5 the black
pawn is pinned, meaning Black would need to recapture with the queen. Black usually
 replies 2...c5, after which play can resemble the 2.d3 variation or the Closed Variation of the
Sicilian Defence.
2.Nf3 d5 3.Nc3 is the Two Knights Variation: 3...d4 and 3...Nf6 are good replies for Black.
2.c4 (attempting to discourage 2...d5 by Black) is the Steiner Variation. But Black can reply
2...d5 anyway, when after 3.cxd5 exd5 4.exd5 Nf6 the only way for White to hold on to his
extra pawn on d5 is to play 5.Bb5+. Black gets good compensation in return for the pawn,
however.
2.Bb5 has occasionally been tried. Notably, Henry Bird defeated Max Fleissig with the
variation during the Vienna 1873 chess tournament.[12]
2.b3 leads to the Réti Gambit after 2...d5 3.Bb2 dxe4, but Black can also decline it with
3...Nf6 4.e5 Nd7 with White going for f4 and Qg4 before putting the knight on f3.

There are also a few rare continuations after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5, including 3.Bd3 (the Schlechter Variation),
3.Be3 (the Alapin Gambit), and 3.c4 (the Diemer–Duhm Gambit, which can also be reached via the
Queen's Gambit Declined).

Early deviations for Black

Although 2...d5 is the most consistent move after 1.e4 e6 2.d4, Black occasionally plays other moves.
Chief among them is 2...c5, the Franco-Benoni Defence, so-called because it features the ...c7–c5 push
characteristic of the Benoni Defence. White may continue 3.d5, when play can transpose into the Benoni,
though White has extra options since c2–c4 is not mandated. 3.Nf3, transposing into a normal Sicilian
Defence, and 3.c3, transposing into a line of the Alapin Sicilian (usually arrived at after 1.e4 c5 2.c3 e6
3.d4) are also common. Play may also lead back to the French; for example, 1.e4 e6 2.d4 c5 3.c3 d5 4.e5
transposes into the Advance Variation. Another move is 2...b6, which transposes into Owen's Defence or
the English Defence. Also possible is 2...f5, the Franco-Hiva Gambit, but this is regarded as dubious.[13]

History
The French Defence is named after a match played by correspondence between the cities of London and
Paris in 1834[1] (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.[14]

As a reply to 1.e4, the French Defence received relatively little attention in the nineteenth century compared
to 1...e5. 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".[15] In the early 20th century, Géza Maróczy was perhaps the
first world-class player to make it his primary weapon against 1.e4. For a long time, it was the third most
popular reply to 1.e4, behind only 1...c5 and 1...e5. However, according to the Mega Database 2007,[16] in
2006, 1...e6 was second only to the Sicilian in popularity.

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, and Yury Shulman.

The Exchange Variation was recommended by Howard Staunton in the 19th century,[17] but has been in
decline ever since. In the early 1990s Garry Kasparov briefly experimented with it before switching to
3.Nc3. Note that Black's game is made much easier as his queen's bishop has been liberated. It has the
reputation of giving immediate equality 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. However,
the Advance declined in popularity throughout most of the 20th century until it was revived in the 1980s by
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.

ECO codes
The Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings includes an alphanumeric classification system for openings that is
widely used in chess literature. Codes C00 to C19 are the French Defence, broken up in the following way
(all apart from C00 start with the moves 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5):

C00 – 1.e4 e6 without 2.d4, or 2.d4 without 2...d5 (early deviations)

C01 – 2.d4 d5 (includes the Exchange Variation, 3.exd5)
C02 – 3.e5 (Advance Variation)
C03 – 3.Nd2 (includes 3...Be7; C03–C09 cover the Tarrasch Variation)
C04 – 3.Nd2 Nc6 (Guimard Variation)
C05 – 3.Nd2 Nf6
C06 – 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Bd3
C07 – 3.Nd2 c5 (includes 4.exd5 Qxd5)
C08 – 3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 exd5
C09 – 3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 exd5 5.Ngf3 Nc6
C10 – 3.Nc3 (includes the Rubinstein Variation, 3...dxe4)
C11 – 3.Nc3 Nf6 (includes the Steinitz Variation, 4.e5; C11–C14 cover the Classical
Variation)
C12 – 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 (includes the McCutcheon Variation, 4...Bb4)
C13 – 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 dxe4 (Burn Variation)
C14 – 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7
C15 – 3.Nc3 Bb4 (C15–C19 cover the Winawer Variation)
C16 – 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5
C17 – 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5
C18 – 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 (includes the Armenian Variation, 5...Ba5)
C19 – 3.Nc3 Bb4 4 e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Ne7 7.Nf3 and 7.a4

See also
List of chess openings
List of chess openings named after places

References
1. "London Chess Club vs. Paris Chess Club, corr. 1834" (http://www.chessgames.com/perl/ch
essgame?gid=1264172). Chessgames.com.
2. T.D. Harding, French: MacCutcheon [sic] and Advance Lines, Batsford, 1979, pp. 12, 56.
ISBN 0-7134-2026-X.
 3. Although many sources refer to John Lindsay McCutcheon and his eponymous variation as
"MacCutcheon", "McCutcheon" is the correct spelling. Jeremy Gaige, Chess Personalia,
McFarland & Company, 1987, pp. 260, 275. ISBN 0-7864-2353-6; David Hooper and
Kenneth Whyld, The Oxford Companion to Chess (2nd ed. 1992), Oxford University Press,
p. 240, p. 478 n. 1205. ISBN 0-19-866164-9.
4. "Wilhelm Steinitz vs. John Lindsay McCutcheon (1885)" (http://www.chessgames.com/perl/c
hessgame?gid=1296635). Chessgames.com.
5. "French Defense Tarrasch Variation Morozevich Variation – Chess Opening" (https://chesste
mpo.com/gamedb/opening/688). chesstempo.com.
6. *Hooper, David; Whyld, Kenneth (1996) [First pub. 1992]. "Milner-Barry Gambit". The Oxford
Companion to Chess (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. p. 260. ISBN 978-0-19-280049-7.
7. Watson, John. "French Defence" (https://www.chesspublishing.com/content/2/dec14.htm).
Chess Publishing. Retrieved 13 June 2020.
8. "Capablanca vs. Maroczy, Lake Hopatcong 1926" (http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessg
ame?gid=1094365). Chessgames.com.
9. "Tatai vs. Korchnoi, Be'er Sheva 1978" (http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1
082469). Chessgames.com.
10. "Gurevich vs. Short, Manila 1990" (http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=11244
51). Chessgames.com.
11. "C00: French, Labourdonnais variation – 1. e4 e6 2. f4 – Chess Opening explorer" (https://w
ww.365chess.com/opening.php?m=4&n=209&ms=e4.e6.f4&ns=3.16.209).
www.365chess.com.
12. "Bird, Henry – Fleissig, Max 1873 , Vienna , Vienna" (https://chesstempo.com/gamedb/gam
e/2183872/rnbqkbnr/pppp1ppp/4p3/1B6/4P3/8/PPPP1PPP/RNBQK1NR+b+KQkq+-+1+2).
chesstempo.com.
13. Watson, John: Taming Wild Chess Openings (https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=fidBCwA
AQBAJ&pg=PA3&lpg=PA3&dq=%221.e4+e6+2.d4+f5%22&source=bl&ots=gwYS6PCffR&s
ig=10NWMb3opZk8VPtHp-7bl7Gt4DU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjPjpS22-jUAhUpKsA
KHbD1B8gQ6AEIVjAJ#v=onepage&q&f=false) p.67
14. Le Palamède edited by St. Amant (1846), p. 20.
15. "The Cable Match Between Messrs.Tschigorin and Steinitz" (https://books.google.com/book
s?id=jDACAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA27). The International Chess Magazine. 7.1. January 1891.
p. 27. Retrieved 16 September 2013.
16. "Mega Database 2007" (https://web.archive.org/web/20070208035746/http://www.chessbas
e.com/shop/product.asp?pid=255). Archived from the original (http://www.chessbase.com/sh
op/product.asp?pid=255) on 2007-02-08. Retrieved 2007-02-04.
17. p369, Howard Staunton, The Chess-Player's Handbook, 1847, H.G.Bohn.

Further reading
Berg, Emanuel (2013). Grandmaster Repertoire The French Defence Volume One. Quality
Chess. ISBN 978-1907982408.
Berg, Emanuel (2014). Grandmaster Repertoire The French Defence Volume Two. Quality
Chess. ISBN 978-1907982422.
Berg, Emanuel (2015). Grandmaster Repertoire The French Defence Volume Three. Quality
Chess. ISBN 978-1907982859.
Eingorn, Viacheslav (2008). Chess Explained: The French. Gambit Publications. ISBN 978-
1-904600-95-4.
Moskalenko, Viktor (2008). The Flexible French. New In Chess. ISBN 978-90-5691-245-1.
 Moskalenko, Viktor (2010). The Wonderful Winawer. New In Chess. ISBN 978-90-5691-327-
4.
Moskalenko, Viktor (2015). The Even More Flexible French: Strategic Ideas and Powerful
Weapons. New In Chess. ISBN 978-9056915742.
Tzermiadianos, Andreas (2008). How to Beat the French Defence: The Essential Guide to
the Tarrasch. Everyman Chess. ISBN 9781857445671.
Vitiugov, Nikita (2010). The French Defence. Chess Stars. ISBN 978-954-8782-76-0.
Watson, John (2012). Play the French 4th ed. Everyman Chess. ISBN 978-1857446807.
Williams, Simon (2011). Attacking Chess The French: A Dynamic Repertoire for Black.
Everyman Chess. ISBN 978-1857446807.

External links
The Anatomy of the French Advance (http://brooklyn64.com/2010/the-anatomy-of-the-french-
advance/)
“6 h4 in the French Defence” by Edward Winter (http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/extra/fre
nch.html)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=French_Defence&oldid=1051544448"

This page was last edited on 24 October 2021, at 04:54 (UTC).

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using
this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia
Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.