I play against the London quite a bit. I don't know any "systems" against the opening, but here's some advice an NM gave me. White's only serious attempt to gain an advantage after 1. d4 d5, is to offer the Queen's Gambit, according to opening theory, anyway. If White doesn't play 2. c4, then Black almost always gets the chance to play ...c5 and it's always good to do so. Seems to work for me.
Originally posted by Maxacre42When Black responds with ...c5 after ...d5 in these systems, the game is -in effect- a Queen's Gambit reversed, Baltic Defense. People do not tend to view the game as such, but there it is!
You don't really need to waste time with a lesson against it. Just respond with c5 and dominate.
To carry it further, the Colle-Koltanowski is essentially a QGD Semi-Slav in reverse, and the Colle-Zuckertort is effectively a QGD- Tartakower Variation in reverse.
That guy who is writing the new Colle books (is it David Rudel? I hope I have his name right) it advocating some "new" systems that are very interesting, as I think he is basically carrying the Colle/Semi-Slav theme a step further by advocating new more orders that are essentially the QGD, Cambridge Springs Defense and QGD, Meran Defenses in reverse. More power to him, as I have played some games like this in the early 1990's with success.
I don't think ...c5 is a refutation by any means, but it is probably the most sound and principled response if you are not a King's Indian Defense player.
Paul
Originally posted by chesskid001hmm, on a first look I do not like it much, but I may try it for a few games...of course white will take with e pawn...
Here's an effective system I've learned- You basically adopt a Queen's Indian defense setup- fianchetto on the queenside, play c5, and take on d4, i.e.
[pgn] 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.Bf4 b6 4.e3 c5 5.c3 Bb7 6.Bd3 cxd4 [/pgn].
Many times you can win the dark squared bishop if white replies cxd4 by playing Nh5
First: who says London System is weak is either very strong, either he is weak and does not know what he says. I have huge problems against 2 2200 ELO players that use this system.
I see most of you recommend c5 at some point...I suppose it will not be 1 ...c5 , but something like 1....Nf6 2...d5 3...c5 or similar...
Ok, I tried something like this but after e6 the light squares black bishop will have problems for most of the game...do you recommend next to develop it with b6 and Bb7,
or to delay e6 and go Qb6 which helps developing the B to f5 before e6...I checked in some games this line on the databases and it looks, pretty good, what do you think ?
Originally posted by vipiuIt's not that it's weak. Objectively, it's simply not as strong as d4, c4. It doesn't really try to gain an opening advantage, instead it aims for an equal middlegame on more familiar ground. Other pluses are that it's only a small amount of theory to learn and it's very solid (drawish?).
First: who says London System is weak is either very strong, either he is weak and does not know what he says. I have huge problems against 2 2200 ELO players that use this system.
I see most of you recommend c5 at some point...I suppose it will not be 1 ...c5 , but something like 1....Nf6 2...d5 3...c5 or similar...
Ok, I tried something like this but after ...[text shortened]... checked in some games this line on the databases and it looks, pretty good, what do you think ?
However, one can simply not expect that using that same piece setup against anything to be very good against every line. Once you find that line you shouldn't have much trouble getting a simple enough middlegame against these guys. But if their tactics or endgame skill outmatch yours, don't blame the strength of the opening!
p.s. Correct me if I'm wrong though, I'm probably one of those guys in the ''does not know what he says'' category.
Originally posted by vipiuhi vipiu it seems to me, from a purely strategical point of view that the main objective of the London player is to get a grip on the e5 square and use it as a basis for operations (that is why he develops with 1.d4, Bf4 and Nf3.) It therefore works particularly well against those opening systems which begin 1.d4 d5, for now, since the d pawn is not available to control the e5 square. With this in mind, you should try to develop a system that denies the e5 square to the white player. The London player is aware that ...c5 shall inevitably be played, and the exchange of the c pawn for whites d pawn is almost obligatory.
First: who says London System is weak is either very strong, either he is weak and does not know what he says. I have huge problems against 2 2200 ELO players that use this system.
I see most of you recommend c5 at some point...I suppose it will not be 1 ...c5 , but something like 1....Nf6 2...d5 3...c5 or similar...
Ok, I tried something like this but after ...[text shortened]... checked in some games this line on the databases and it looks, pretty good, what do you think ?
Originally posted by Maxacre42you say: "It's not that it's weak."...so you do not fit that category 🙂
It's not that it's weak. Objectively, it's simply not as strong as d4, c4. It doesn't really try to gain an opening advantage, instead it aims for an equal middlegame on more familiar ground. Other pluses are that it's only a small amount of theory to learn and it's very solid (drawish?).
However, one can simply not expect that using that same piece setu ...[text shortened]... gh, I'm probably one of those guys in the ''does not know what he says'' category.
We play only blitz. I loose about 30-40% of the games as black in the opening..I did not stick with a system, tried different things(nut mouch c5 lines) with bad results...
Probably their middlegame and endgame skills are better than me, but the fact that I score about 50% as white against them, should tell me that the percentage of the games they win against me right form the opening is a bit too high...
I want opinions of the d5 Nf6 c5 Qb6 Bf5 e6 system...
Although I've won the majority of Blacks v The London System it was not
the opening that was at fault but rather my opponent walking into a tactic
or me outplaying them.
There is nothing really wrong with it except it does nothing and depends on
Black to 'do something' (my opinion). It's the d-pawn version of the Vienna.
Looking for a weakness or some ideas against it I have played it a few
times in Blitz and skittles games. This is a good idea if you are having trouble
v an opening. Play it yourself.
But like any opening it's just a method of developing your pieces for the
coming middle game.
(the more important phase of the game).
It's drawback is it gives Black a free hand. Which cannot be a bad thing as most
players (me included) beat ourselves by coming up with cock-eyed ideas when
it's best to simply do nothing.
At a rough guess, 70% of the pure chess posts in this forum are to do with openings.
The better chess player will turn around any advantage his opponent has
gained from the opening in the middle game.
Often after a one move mistake by their opponent.
Any opening that does violate the standard opening principles is playable.
The hard part of the game is the middle game and avoiding mistakes.
Budding chess players should concentrate their engeries on this aspect of
their game. It's where games are won or lost.
Originally posted by robbie carrobiemaybe the reason I was losing was that I was trying mainly c6 and to push e5, which was a bit slower than his minority attacks later on...
hi vipiu it seems to me, from a purely strategical point of view that the main objective of the London player is to get a grip on the e5 square and use it as a basis for operations (that is why he develops with 1.d4, Bf4 and Nf3.) It therefore works particularly well against those opening systems which begin 1.d4 d5, for now, since the d pawn is not ...[text shortened]... all inevitably be played, and the exchange of the c pawn for whites d pawn is almost obligatory.
Originally posted by greenpawn34good to have you back.
Although I've won the majority of Blacks v The London System it was not
the opening that was at fault but rather my opponent walking into a tactic
or me outplaying them.
There is nothing really wrong with it except it does nothing and depends on
Black to 'do something' (my opinion). It's the d-pawn version of the Vienna.
Looking for a weakness o ...[text shortened]... centrate their engeries on this aspect of
their game. It's where games are won or lost.
I agree it is annoying to talk about opening, but especially in blitz, especially when playing the same players again and again, and they are a bit stronger, you need some opening preparation...I hardly wait no next week chess club meeting to try my new Qb6 system...