The French Connection: Volume 6

Hello and welcome to the sixth edition of The French Connection. This go round, we are going to look at an extremely critical concept in French theory, and that is the concept of the blockade. The blockade can come in many shapes and sizes, but here we are going to look at the classic case of the blockade. Specifically a concept that Aron Nimzowitsch came up with. The concept is simple, though the execution may not be. The idea is that Black will be chipping away at White's center via the moves ...c5 and ...f6. Nimzowitsch's idea was that rather than trying to hold the central pawn structure together, he voluntarily would capture these pawns himself, relinquishing his central pawns, but then maintain control of the d4 and e5 squares by occupying them with pieces, not allowing Black to advance the central pawns and keeping his light-squared Bishop passive, and often times this can have a ripple effect on the rest of his pieces.

For example, the following is a position that Aron Nimzowitsch composed himself to illustrate the rippling effects of the blockade:

It is Black to move here, with Black up an exchange and a pawn. Despite all of that, Nimzowitsch claimed that White is better here, and if you spend enough time looking at the position, you will soon realize that he is absolutely right. Black can hold on to the draw here, but there is also room for Black to lose. Simply blocking the h6-pawn and toggling the Rook between a8 and b8 is probably sufficient, but a more dramatic illustration comes from the line 1...Kg7 2.Kg4 Kf6 3.Kf4 Ke7 4.h6 Bd7 5.h7 Rf8+ 6.Kg5 Be8 7.Kh6 Rf1 8.h8=Q Rh1+ 9.Kg7 Rxh8 10.Kxh8 and the position is equal.

Normally, this late in an endgame, being down an exchange and a pawn is fatal, but this just goes to illustrate how strong of a concept this can be in the right situations.

I would highly recommend going through the following two games, which I put in links to those games so that you can go through them. All you have to do is click on the game itself. These two games, both of which featuring Nimzowitsch as White, clearly illustrate his concept. Both games are also annotated there.

Nimzowitsch - Salwe, Carlsbad 1911
Nimzowitsch - Levenfish, Carlsbad 1911

What I would like to discuss is a more recent game played by a more modern expert of the French Advance, specifically Evgeny Sveshnikov. He is a well known specialist in playing the White side of the c3-Sicilian and the French Advance. This game, played 26 years ago, illustrates how little importance there is in having the Bishop pair is when one of them is completely blocked while the other is staring at nothing except the ability to remove one of the two blockaders. Not only will these Knights block Black's position, but they also have an effect on the Black King, particularly the light squares around the Black King. This game will also illustrate what Black needs to not allow, and also shows that moves that break White's center, like ...f6, are not totally automatic in the French Defense.


W: Sveshnikov
B: Dukhov
Tal Memorial, Moscow 1992

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Nh6

This is one of many options for Black. Others include 5...Qb6, 5...Bd7, and 5...Nge7, along with more offbeat lines like 4...Qb6 and 5...Bd7, or 4...Bd7 and 5...a6 (like I gave in the French Repertoire back in August). None of these moves are refuted, but each one has its own drawbacks.

6.dxc5

According to many of the experts on the French, like Korchnoi and Sveshnikov, this move gives Black the greatest challenge in this particular line. Move order is critical as we will see at Black's 7th move. Another word of note about taking pawns away from the center. This should only be considered if Black cannot recapture with a pawn. Here Black is forced to take with a piece.

6...Bxc5 7.b4 Bb6

This is the point of the move order and why White has not captured the Knight on h6 on move 6. If that trade has already happened, then Black might think about retreating the Bishop to f8 in order to relocate to g7, advance f6, and pressure the White e-pawn. Here, White has not taken on h6, and so 7...Bf8 would be ludicrous as White would then be under no obligation to capture the Knight.

8.Bxh6

Now that the Bishop is not on f8, White decided to take the Knight. This also forces the g-pawn away from g7, making the idea of capturing on f6 when Black advances the pawn more attractive as Black won't be able to take back with the g-pawn, but again will have to recapture with a piece, which will lead to the theme of this game.

8...gxh6 9.b5 Ne7 10.Bd3 Ng6 11.O-O

11...f6?

Black should play 11...Qe7 instead. The move played creates a lot of weaknesses on the Kingside.

12.Bxg6 hxg6 13.Qd3 Kf7

Black would have been better off trying to block the position as much as possible, making 13...f5 the lesser evil.

14.exf6

The clearance of the central dark squares is complete. Black cannot take back with a pawn, and White is able to maintain control of d4 and e5, which is the only reason why this entire idea works.

14...Qxf6 15.Nbd2 Rd8 16.Rae1 a6

Too little, too late! Chipping away at the Queenside isn't going to do Black must good when White is clearly ready to block the center and attack the Kingside.

17.Ne5+ Kg7 18.Ndf3 Bd7 19.Nd4

Sveshnikov analyzes this game himself in a book of his on the French Advance from 2007. Based on what he says, the implication is that he sees White as already winning. I would beg to differ, but White is definitely better here. Black's Bishop pair is nothing resembling the value that many books preach on the Bishop pair.

19...Bxd4 20.Qxd4 axb5?

Sveshnikov states that after 20...Bxb5 21.Re3 Bxf1 22.Rf3 that White is winning. However, the move 22...Qg5, which threatens mate on g2, I think is underestimated by Sveshnikov. After 23.Rg3 Qf5 24.Rxg6+ Qxg6 25.Nxg6+ Kxg6 26.Qg4+ Kh7 27.Kxf1 Re8 28.c4, White is better, and if given the choice of which side I'd want in this position, I'd take White, but there is still a lot of work involved if White plans to get the full point.

21.Re3 Ra4 22.Qb6 Rf4 23.Qc7 g5 24.Nxd7 Qe7 25.Nc5 1-0

If you went through the two games listed at the beginning of the article along with this one, you have seen three examples of the Classic Blockade in the French Defense. Along with the often reiterated "Good Knight versus Bad Bishop" scenario that White is often looking for, this is the other major idea for White in beating the French Defense. There are other forms of the blockade aside from this one involving occupying d4 and e5. In some ways, we have already seen a hybrid form of this in Volume 2 where White uses his Good Knight to occupy the d4-square and block Black's Bad Bishop combined with the pawn still on e5, and we will be seeing many other examples in the coming editions of this, but this one specifically focused on the classic case that Nimzowitsch came up with himself.

Till next time, good luck in all your French games, Black or White!