Caro-Kann defence is an inaccuracy?

It has been bothering me for a while now. The Caro-Kann seems to me like a perfectly sound way to challenge white, but according to Stockfish 2. ... c6 is an inaccuracy. Is there any "human" explanation for this?

engines sometimes don't understand openings

HI
I think that we cannot say any opening an inaccuracy if you follow right variation and follow it theoretically unless it is grob
by the way i love to play french and caro-kann@ilariON579 said in #2:
> engines sometimes don't understand openings
it is right

Yes, Caro-Kann is a very significant inaccuracy. If you know how to take advantage of it you should generally be very happy if someone plays it. I beat the second expert I have ever done when they played that and I was pretty happy.

<3

A very significant inaccuracy? In what way? The french defense is highly recommended by Stockfish, even though it often leads to similar positions.

Why is it bad? Or why is it inaccurate. There's a lot of ways you can look at this or understand it. Black does not contest the center properly; I guess this would be the best way to explain it. "Black should keep a pawn in the center." This was an idea from some grandmasters (Alexey Suetin comes to mind, etc.), back from the days of Polugaevsky, Suetin, Geller, etc., those glory days of chess.

Anyway back to the C-K -- yes you get a pawn in the center; but you allow e5. It's just positionally weak and if White plays accurately this is almost a win from the get-go. Of course that is talking highly accurately but you can do a lot of different simulations and so forth.

Anyway the main thing is this: now you can also look at AlphaZero. Not really a chance it would play 1...c6 and certainly never did. It's just not a very accurate way to play. It's a mistake, and a pretty significant one.

Is it possible to win games from it? Sure! Is it better than 1...h5? Yes. Definitely. But it is vastly inferior to, for example, 1...e5, 1...d6, and 1...c5.

Even as you mentioned, the French. Alphazero never played the French as Black, but Stockfish did in their match a few times, and there was a big push forward in the theory of the line.

For example, Alphazero's method of handling the French is very beautiful. In the French Advance, a3 has long been known, to play b4 and then Bb2 -- forcing Black's c4. So then Stockfish had the idea of Bd7, Nc6-a5, 0-0-0, h6, Be7 etc -- very interesting and nice, and you can find a lot of beauty and goodness in this line this theory; it's wonderful. So Alphazero had a really wonderful way of playing against this as well. -- Essentially, h4, h5, Kf1, Rh3, Kg1 etc. -- Just plays the h-pawn up, brings up the rook, and moves the King over step-by-step. Truly beautiful as it always is.

@TheRoyalPlayer said in #5:
> A very significant inaccuracy? In what way? The french defense is highly recommended by Stockfish, even though it often leads to similar positions.

Sorry that reply took so long. . . ~ 14 minutes. . .

[Edit: I'm being silly and pleasant and not intending animosity (Of course not to you who I'm talking to but to those who seem to attack every thread. . . . . . . ]

Just being pleasant in a way of showing that I shared the info quick. <3

Have a wonderful day.

I would only play Caro-Kann if I had Karpov to teach me :o

I would not bother judging an opening by the engine.

A lot of the differences are very minuscule and often contrary to how humans tend to play. Engines are not always accurate in the opening either.

Also, even though some engines might not give the Caro-Kann better odds than others, they can play it really well and still destroy both players and engines alike.

Almost all World champions have gone for it.

I mean „e6 is best“ - dafuq?