Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with french-defense
Search options questions only
not deleted
user 3456
The French Defense begins with 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5. Black plans to play a solid setup and contest white's center with moves like c5 and Nc6. The biggest drawback to the French Defense is that black's light square bishop is hemmed in by the e6 pawn.
8
votes
3
answers
5k
views
What is wrong with f2-f4 against the French Defense?
[fen ""]
[Startply "3"]
[Title "2.f4 against the French Defense"]
1.e4 e6 2.f4
What is so obviously wrong with this approach? I ask because it is not even mentioned in the complete Black repertoire …
- 3,340
5
votes
1
answer
245
views
Why not 6.Ng3 against the French Rubinstein?
[fen ""]
[Title "6.Ng3 against the French Rubinstein"]
[Startply "11"]
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Nf3 Ngf6 6.Ng3
What is so obviously wrong with the move 6.Ng3 against the French Rubin …
- 3,340