@Brian-E said in #10:
> I didn't express myself clearly enough.
>
> I meant second nature to the type of player who plays that sort of position (and I stand by the statement that players of all ratings can be that type of player, though I accept that some experience is required so I don't mean beginners).
>
> Further, I would gently suggest to you not to take too much notice of either computer evaluations of opening moves or database results. Openings should be played according to your style of play and, sometimes, against the opponent's style of play.
Play the position, not the style.
"I accept that some experience is required so I don't mean beginners"
Thank you for finally admitting that. The next question then is, when do they stop being "beginners"? The assertion that players of all ratings have a style is like saying all caterpillars have the potential of becoming a butterfly, tadpole a frog, or is it like a bat becoming Dracula? I am not here to debate that. There is a saying, address the message not the messenger.
So, when I see a tutorial on the f5 including this French Petrosian line then I will be more than happy to include it in my repetoire once I understand the whys. Because that's my "style". I don't believe people have styles. They have understandings.
I know when I play my f pawn as white in a Sicilian where I have castled short as white, I can run into problems especially if the DSB is still on the board. There is also the Schliemann defense of the Ruy Lopez. This f5 has come up over the years, not as often as the KGA Muzio Gambit, but perhaps that f5 and the French f5 have similar goals.
Not ready to accept this mystery answer that it is due to style. As I stated before, play the position not the style. And understand why.