Can double pawns be a "strong solution"?

http://nb.lichess.org/training/opening/13978

With this pawn structure, how can gxf3 be a good solution to this opening?

Well, compared to everything else besides Bxf3, gxf3 isn't that bad.

@the_black_knight #1

Doubled pawns can offer advantages, besides the disadvantages.

In the puzzle you mention, white gets a stronger center, controlling more squares, and the half open g file.
(Slightly comparable with the Nf6, gxf6, Larsen/Bronstein line in the Caro-Kann opening)

Here's a few postings regarding doubled and tripled pawns :
http://www.chess.com/blog/achja/from-1400-to-1500--doubled-pawns-and-positional-chess

http://www.chess.com/blog/achja/the-mighty-triplepawns

http://www.chess.com/blog/achja/going-beyond-rules-of-thumb

Yes, Bxf3 I can easily understand. Double pawns = bad is what I've learned. Why would I want it? Bf4 / Bg5 would be a better second solution to the opening moves.

@achja #3

OK. Thanks :)

It's asking you to give TWO strong moves. Bxf3 and gxf3 are the two only moves that recapture the piece. Bxf3 is stronger than gxf3, but gxf3 is stronger than any other move. If you play any other move besides Bxf3 or gxf3 you will lose a piece. It's better to have doubled pawns than play a piece down. Ok?

#4

Because then you are not capturing the bishop. Your opponent having an extra bishop will always be a much bigger disadvantage to you than having doubled pawns or a slightly underdeveloped bishop ever will