1. e4, e6 (I know that Black's plan of attack here is to make a Protected Advance, threatening my undefended pawn on e4 and open up lines with a developing move, namely d5. So, (knowing this), I either have to protect it, move it, exchange it, or make a better aggressive attacking move. I dont see any targets i can take advantadge of in a move or 2. So, Normally i would just consider: exd5, e5, Nc3, d3, d4, and Nf3. Note: Nf3 and d4, while good developing moves, they are, dont confront the isuue at hand. the Problem with d3 is, although protecting, it would potientially allow Black to "trade queens" and disable my chance of casteling, permanantly. Nc3? would be fine, except, you are playing into Black's hand, his developing move, e6 naturally takes away the square from the white knight, and infact, after d5 is played by Black, it threatens d4! chasing the knight and gaining space. Also, Nc3 followed by d4 is possible; however, after making 2 defensive moves in a row (Nc3 defending the pawn), and d4 (defending against the pawn push), you are trading having pieces tied down to the pawn for a more mobile queen side bishop, and i evalute that as being equal. How about e5? while that blocks his e pawn and takes away a square from his king side knight, and removes it from being a target.... it doesnt seem to do much, just a reactive move. exd5 doesnt lead to an advantadge, and opens up his queenside Bishop. The other possiblility, which i will now name is: that i consider here is 2. g3! Preparing Bg2 and not having the problems mentioned above.) Defending it in 2 moves while not being forced into a normal Book situation. Also, I dont plan on developing my bishop to c4, b5, or d3 because d3 is blocking, and b5, c4 might be a target later, and c4 is already dead in the water by the move e6!
2. g3, d5 ( the plan is being carried out)
3. Bg2, if Nf6 then e5! with tempo.... if dxe4 then either Bxe4 or Nc3 (a gambit idea) The White Plan is as follows: develop the white knight to either e2 or h3, but not f3. Overprotect e4 with d3, if possible. Castle Early (preferably King-side). And depending on how the game progresses (maybe transpose into a king's indian attack?!)
Another possibilty that i just thought of is: 2. c3 (since the knight isnt going there anyway)..... then follwed by Bd3 and Bc2 (if attacked) or Qc2 and the idea is to play for e5, opening up that diagonal at the opportune time to attack the black castled king. Usually d4 is played before Bd3 is considered, so that the other bishop doesnt end up blocked by your d-pawn, but the way i figure it is, c3 not only opens up an extra escape square for your bishop, but opens up your queen too and prevents Nb4 later on, and if Ne5, for example later, attacking it, the escape sqaure will come in handy and the sup-rise move of d4! can then be antisipated.
But, after all that, i find that Bg2 adds more pressure to the center, and an escape square for the king on the back rank after castled. Is this idea any good? And what about the gambit idea on move 3, which side has the advantadge after black plays f5!? Prefer the development or the pawn???

I ran this through Chessbase and game up with the following…not a large amount of games, but it’ll give you an idea of the stats for the line.

Black scores above average (51%).
White wins: 16 (=34%), Draws: 14 (=30%), Black wins: 17 (=36%)

Here are stats for the French after the normal 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5
Black scores averagely (45%).
White wins: 15094 (=37%), Draws: 14188 (=35%), Black wins: 11212 (=28%)

So while the line is not bad, White does better using the normal 2.d4. But if you are comfortable with it then play it. You are thinking for yourself which in itself is unusual for a lot of players.

I'd be cautious to give any odd variation against the French an exclamation.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't both Réti and Spielmann experiment with this? It's okay, though not that dangerous at this point for black. White should be looking for a KIA setup. I was looking at this particular line:

1. e4 e6 2. g3 d5 3. Bg2 dxe4 4. Nc3 Nf6 5. Nxe4 Nxe4 6. Bxe4 Be7 7. d4 c5
There are various other possibilities, if black misses the right idea(s) white can run off with a bit of an advantage, but after my line, I think black's equal.

EDIT:
That all said, if you're looking for a KIA setup, play 2. d3 instead. It really is better.

Looking at the KIA, and move#2 = d3.... after Black plays d5 and white plays 3. Nd2, my evalution of it is: i think that 2. g3, 3. Bg2 may be better because it reserves d4 and Nc3 as possibilities, which may or may not be chosen later. Even if those possibilites arent chosen, I feel that it is good to simply have them as options....

But, really, I want to know is the Gambit Variation any good which is:
1. e4, e6
2. g3, d5
3. Bg2, dxe4
4. Nc3, f5!?

From here, is it better to play f3, with a lead in development, re-capturing with the knight and open e and f files for the rooks? Or is it better to play Nh3, a safer, more developing move, and if e5 is played then - to play, Nxe4!, fxe4? Qh5+!!

This is an interesting idea. Any GM's play this opening? Only problem I see with it is that it seems to be white chickening out of a fight. The Milner Berry Gambit against the French is white's most promising response to 1.) ...e6 I think.

AO

Are you kidding?

These 2. g3 and 2. d3 lines both seem OK for white. If nothing else, you end up in a KIA formation that gets black out of his prepared lines and forces him to think for himself. Maybe they're not good enough at the GM level, but for us mere mortals, they're certainly playable. I'm a French player as black, and these would get me out of my preparation, but not in a way that I'd consider really scary. All in all, these could both lead to decent games, with chances for both sides.

The Milner-Barry Gambit, on the other hand, just gives away a pawn for nothing. I played a league game a couple of weeks ago against a guy who plays it, so I had time to prepare in advance, knowing I would probably face it. I was nervous when I first looked at it, but after studying it some, it no longer scares me at all.

The key for black is not to be greedy. After 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.Bd3 cxd4 7.cxd4 Bd7 8.O-O Nxd4 9.Nxd4 Qxd4 10.Nc3, we get to this position:


Black to move.

If black lets white keep his e5 pawn, it actually gets in the way of white's middle game attack up the d and e files. Black plays 10. ... a6 to cover the b5 square, instead of 10. ... Qxe5, and then just sits back and trades down to an endgame with an extra pawn.

--Fromper

Let me get one thing out of the way. The g3 line is definitely not better than 2. d3. It will be when you play the wrong moves.

2. g3
The line I gave last time:
1. e4 e6 2. g3 d5 3. Bg2 dxe4 4. Nc3 Nf6 5. Nxe4 Nxe4 6. Bxe4 Nd7 7. d4 c5
These moves are ridiculously easy to find for any decent French player I would think and black is definitely equal here. Why? White has been making
'funny moves', taking time out to fianchetto, black has been keeping to his thematic moves.

Your line:
1. e4 e6 2. g3 d5 3. Bg2 dxe4 4. Nc3 f5 5. f3 exf3 6. Nxf3 Nf6 7. O-O Be7 8. d3 O-O 9. Bf4
Black is equal but the position is harder for most French players. While it is still beyond (my) doubt(s) that black is at least equal, some of the more 'human' French defenders would miss something that would give white something. The position is basically a Dutch defense with a traded off d-pawn. The e6-pawn is weak, the e5-square is weak, white is developed, black is somewhat lagging. But black has a pawn and a solid position that won't crumble easily.

Something even more simple:
1. e4 e6 2. g3 d5 3. Bg2 dxe4 4. Nc3 e5 5. Nxe4 Nc6 6. d3 Nf6
Black is playing the white side of a Pirc now. I think black has a wee bit of an advantage in this line. Most French players won't push e5, but the idea is played in related Petrov lines and for instance the Chigorin French (1. e4 e6 2. Qe2 e5 3 and white has to step back with Qd1 in most cases).

2. d3

There is a (pretty much) untested line that leaves the d3 theory fast.
1. e4 e6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. Ngf3 Nf6 5. Be2
I think this line is much harder for black to properly meet. Equality isn't as simple, though theoretical just as possible. Admittedly, it abandons the fianchetto (and thus KIA'ish stuff).

Why would black try to keep the extra pawn on e4? IF he simply goes for rapid development in the 2.g3 line, he's fine:

1.e4 e6 2.g3 d5 3.Bg2 de 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.Nxe4 (delaying this capture doesn't appear to change things) Nxe4 6.Bxe4 Bc5 and the fact that white has to deal with the threat of Qd4 gives black a slight advantage.

(Obviously, that's not a major threat, but the point here is that white has to develop unnaturally Ne2 or Qe2,or fall further behind in development - whereas black can play Nd7-f6 and 0-0 and be fine. )

Some players will try to keep the pawn, but I doubt most strong ones will.

The d3 line you give seems really passive. Why tie your own pieces up in knots there? I'm sure it's theoretically no worse than =, but with the Nd2 blocking the bishop, and black having a comfortable space advantage, and the Bc8 being no worse than the Be2, I fail to see white's play as being very ambitious.

That being said, one line I've enjoyed playing against the French is 1.e4 e6 2.Nf3 d5 3.Nc3.

So you are saying the Milner Berry Gambit is bad for White then! I had heard it was refuted, but that you'd need to be a GM to know how to disarm it and keep Whites gambited pawn. I also think Tal invented the a6 defence. Is that correct Fromper?

AO

Yes, I'm saying it's bad for white. I'm no GM, and keeping the first gambited pawn doesn't seem that tough to me. If black takes the second gambit pawn on e5, he can't keep that one, and white gets a decent attack out of it.

I don't know who invented the a6 defense, but that's how I'll probably stick to playing against that gambit, at least until someone comes along and gives me a good reason not to.

--Fromper