Here's the newest Dennis video, with sound!

Also, I found it humorous that someone gave the version of this video without sound 5 stars. Dennis must've used some great arrows and circles on the board

Thanks for getting the sound fixed. I think all of the videos from Dennis are awesome! Some of them do have audio issues, namely the audio sometimes being too quiet, so if we could get Dennis to check his mic volumes before recording, that would be great too.

BEATING the French? Really?

Well, more like a guide to playing against it!

In fairness to Dennis, his title was "Attacking the French," but I like this title more

Thanks Dennis. After watching this I went through a few of my games where I could have employed this, and I think I will try it a few times

Josh, I actually prefer FM Dennis' title better, the same way I enjoy how he strongly endeavors to be objective and fair in his analyses. Besides, it sounds like part 2 might not be as much of a disaster for Black.

Quite entertaining, although the whole time I felt in suspense for part 2 to find out what, if anything, Black may be aiming for. OTB (and especially in bughouse, but also in G/30-60 standard) I've gone for insane material grabs (like 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6 3. c4?! c6 4. dxc6?), so I (as Black) would definitely be a sucker for this opening, if I played the French.

I personally would have liked better if you told first most solid response from black and after that given some examples of where one could go wrong and not other way around. I guess it's matter of taste but I personally would like to learn this way. Sort of get the most solid ideas and start from there.

I'm sure we'll get them next week

herrahu,

That seems rather strange to me. If I were providing a play-the-French service, then I'd agree with you, but since I'm not, I don't. To me, at least, it would seem odd if someone presented something like this: "Ok, here's a variation that nobody plays and here's a bunch of ways to refute it. Got it? Good. Now let's spend forty minutes showing what happens if you forget any of the dozen defen...hello? Where did everyone go?" It's a lot less interesting that way, sort of like a mystery movie where you know from the beginning who did it and how, and then hear the detective invent ways an inferior detective might have gone awry. Maybe that would be useful for students in detective school, but it would make for a lousy story.

So by presenting it the way I did, it made for a much more interesting presentation. It had several other advantages, too. First, I gave those facing the French an interesting line they can use with a semi-clear conscience, at least for a week. Second, there's much more value in trying to solve problems than being handed the solutions, and this way of presenting the line made that possible. Third, anyone who wanted a cure, but didn't feel like working it out or waiting a week could always switch on an engine. Fourth, an important part of the presentation focused on the psychology of responding to variations like this, and it would be much more difficult to make that case in a compelling way by starting with the refutations. In sum, while I'd feel the way you did too, if my only interest in this line was how to meet it, I think at least most of the other motivations for watching the show are better served by showing the problems first, solutions second.

DandyDanD,

Please drop me a note (via regular email) to let me know where you are and what you've been up to since graduation. (Retroactive congratulations!)