[Event "French Defence - McCutcheon Variation: 6.Bc1 Intro"] [Site "https://lichess.org/study/ZkaQEUd4/sz6EOkNp"] [Result "*"] [Variant "Standard"] [ECO "C12"] [Opening "French Defense: MacCutcheon Variation, Dr. Olland Variation"] [Annotator "https://lichess.org/@/chessentialsBLOG"] [UTCDate "2023.02.10"] [UTCTime "11:52:18"] [Source "https://lichess.org/study/ZkaQEUd4/sz6EOkNp"] [Orientation "white"] 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Bb4 5. e5 h6 6. Bc1 { As mentioned above in my analysis of 6.Be3 - if White doesn't intend to defend the knight on c3 with the bishop on d2, then going back to c1 might be worth considering. Not only does the bishop keep the option of potentially going to a3 in the future if Black takes on c3 - but there is also a very specific point in a very specific variation that showcases how having the bishop on the back rank can be useful. } 6... Ne4 7. Qg4 g6 8. Ne2 { If you recall the analysis of the 6.Be3 line, here this knight move - reinforcing c3, wasn't too good due to the following sequence. } (8. a3 { Note that this move - which was playable with the bishop on e3 - is also possible here. But with the bishop on c1 White has some flexibility. }) 8... c5 9. a3 Qa5 { With the bishop on e3, this was unpleasant for White, but here this concept is refuted very strongly with the exchange sacrifice! } 10. axb4! Qxa1 { If the bishop wasn't on c1, this would be check, but here it is not the case and White can obtain a big advantage with } { [%csl Gc1][%cal Re2c1] } 11. Nxe4 (11. Nxd5 { Is maybe even stronger. }) *