Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Topic Tools
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) London system move order (Read 16623 times)
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 865
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: London system move order
Reply #24 - 05/19/16 at 20:03:56
Post Tools
RdC wrote on 03/02/16 at 00:03:47:
If they play 2. Bf4, you have the almost certainty that they are playing the London System, so you use whatever is your pet defence.



ChessBase has a new DVD by Nigel Davies on a system where they intend 3. Nc3 after 2. Bf4. That's potentially dangerous for Black unless confident about how to defend against either the Barry Attack, if you play .. d5, or the 150 Attack with an early Bh6 if you go .. Bg7 and .. d6.

Mark Hebden uses this line, but it's also been tried by Grischuk, Aronian and Karjakin, admittedly only in Rapid and Blitz.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4627
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: London system move order
Reply #23 - 04/19/16 at 23:03:14
Post Tools
RdC wrote on 04/19/16 at 20:22:09:
Talking of Stonewalls, here's Kramnik's try against Grandelius in round 1 of the Norway tournament


Well, it's a known thing, e.g. ECO has had it as leading to equality.  I thought it might have come up fairly recently in Chess Publishing, but maybe that's wrong.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 865
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: London system move order
Reply #22 - 04/19/16 at 20:22:09
Post Tools
RdC wrote on 03/02/16 at 00:03:47:
I had faced an early g4 in round 3, whilst the round 5 opponent had preferred .. d5 to .. d6 and faced an idea where the Bishop dropped back to g3 and f4 was punted, giving a Stonewall look to the position.



Talking of Stonewalls, here's Kramnik's try against Grandelius in round 1 of the Norway tournament

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 865
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: London system move order
Reply #21 - 03/02/16 at 00:03:47
Post Tools
fling wrote on 03/01/16 at 23:14:35:
Maybe that is a reason for recommending 2. Bf4. Eric Prie has spent some time on discussing move orders in the London and related set ups, as already mentioned in the thread.
                   


Defending against this stuff, they play 1. d4, you reply .. Nf6, they play 2. Nf3. What do they intend? Do you trust them to play c4, either immediately or later, or are they intending  3. Bf4 (arguably harmless), Bg5 (similarly) or 3. Nc3 which is annoying by threatening a transposition to a Pirc. You can play 2. .. c5 against 2. Nf3, but you are then potentially committed to a Benoni or Benko lookalike if they play 3. d5 . If you would prefer to play e6 rather than g6 against the Torre or London, there's another problem, as demonstrated recently by Kramnik, that the sequence 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. e3 has its points.

If they play 2. Bf4, you have the almost certainty that they are playing the London System, so you use whatever is your pet defence.

There's an English player in Opens who has some attacking ideas in mind when he defers development of his Kings Knight. Losing in both rounds 3 and 5 of a recent tournament might be discouraging. I had faced an early g4 in round 3, whilst the round 5 opponent had preferred .. d5 to .. d6 and faced an idea where the Bishop dropped back to g3 and f4 was punted, giving a Stonewall look to the position.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
fling
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1583
Joined: 01/21/11
Gender: Male
Re: London system move order
Reply #20 - 03/01/16 at 23:14:35
Post Tools
No, from what i can tell it is the opposite i.e. why advocate the move order 1. d4 Nf6 and now 2. Bf4, due to that Black can altogether choose not to play ...d5.

"I've seen advocacy of the 1. d4 Nf6 2. Bf4 move order." And "But as a defender against such systems"

From what I understand, this move order was also regarded as suboptimal against e.g. the KID because Black plays ...d6 and threatens ...e5 in many lines. However, I think I have seen a commented game, probably here at Chesspub, suggesting it is not that simple anyway for Black. I can't remember what it was and don't have it on my phone now. Maybe that is a reason for recommending 2. Bf4. Eric Prie has spent some time on discussing move orders in the London and related set ups, as already mentioned in the thread.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RoleyPoley
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 679
Location: London
Joined: 12/29/13
Gender: Male
Re: London system move order
Reply #19 - 03/01/16 at 21:41:58
Post Tools
fling wrote on 03/01/16 at 20:32:42:
Sorry, I don't get your point? Either can deviate by 1. e4 e5  Grin

The idea is that after 1. d4 d5 2. Bf4 is meant to prevent an early ...c5 and ...Qb6 by Black  1. d4 Nf6 2. Bf4 misses that point because Black hasn't yet played ...d5. Hence the op.


Sorry, my understanding of the OP (i've probably misread this) is that RDC is asking why players with the black pieces dont go for a different set up (to ..d5) once the white player has played Bf4 and therefore indicated he is going to play a london system setup. I dont know much about the london, but i would think that white can still transpose to other lines after Bf4 has been played, as can black....and so choosing not to suggests either both players may not know other lines, or have a specific reason for playing down the lines they do.


  

"As Mikhail Tal would say ' Let's have a bit of hooliganism! '"

Victor Bologan.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Equinox
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 5
Joined: 02/29/16
Re: London system move order
Reply #18 - 03/01/16 at 21:00:20
Post Tools
RdC wrote on 03/01/16 at 11:39:49:
[quote author=242E2B2C25420 link=1369523349/13#13 date=1456782967]I thought players turned to the London system to avoid having to know complex ideas in the opening.


I'm not sure I would call it a complex idea. It's more of a move order nuance. White just needs to be aware of certain possibilities that can occur if Black does not block the light-square bishop's c8-h3 diagonal with an early e7-e6.

If Black does play an early ...e6 and block the bishop in, then White can immediately play Ng1-f3 without a problem.

If Black does not block the bishops diagonal with ...e6, White is still heading for the same familiar London setup, just via a slightly different move order.

RdC wrote on 03/01/16 at 11:39:49:
[quote author=242E2B2C25420 link=1369523349/13#13 date=1456782967]It defeats one of the objectives of playing a non-theory system when you have to know move order tricks to get a decent position from the opening.


I not convinced by the notion of non-theory systems. All openings have theory. The London (and it's close cousin, the Colle) is no different. But the amount of theory is relatively small compared to most mainstream openings.

The only way you could possibly play the London as a non-theory system is to simply bash out the opening moves regardless of what the opponent does and then play against whatever appears on the board after the dust settles. I think this approach is partly to blame for the so-called non-theory system's bad reputation.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
fling
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1583
Joined: 01/21/11
Gender: Male
Re: London system move order
Reply #17 - 03/01/16 at 20:32:42
Post Tools
Sorry, I don't get your point? Either can deviate by 1. e4 e5  Grin

The idea is that after 1. d4 d5 2. Bf4 is meant to prevent an early ...c5 and ...Qb6 by Black  1. d4 Nf6 2. Bf4 misses that point because Black hasn't yet played ...d5. Hence the op.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RoleyPoley
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 679
Location: London
Joined: 12/29/13
Gender: Male
Re: London system move order
Reply #16 - 03/01/16 at 20:10:22
Post Tools
fling wrote on 02/29/16 at 21:56:07:
The Wink was meant to indicate that there are trade-offs and that the original question was about that White shows his cards before Black has played 2...d5. Thus, op asked a valid question on why allow White the pleasure of the desired London and not use the move order to direct play in another direction, as also pointed out by the first responses. At least that is how I read the first posts.

Also, when reviving the thread, it was about 1. d4 Nf6 2. Bf4, not 1. d4 d5. But I fully agree, the latter seems better to meet with 2. Bf4 than 2. Nf3 in case you'd ever want to play the London.


I think this would depend on both players opening knowledge? Either could deviate if they knew enough. Perhaps its just a case of people not having a line against it, or the opposite in that they do have a specific variation to play?
  

"As Mikhail Tal would say ' Let's have a bit of hooliganism! '"

Victor Bologan.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
fling
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1583
Joined: 01/21/11
Gender: Male
Re: London system move order
Reply #15 - 03/01/16 at 17:49:16
Post Tools
RdC wrote on 03/01/16 at 11:39:49:
I thought players turned to the London system to avoid having to know complex ideas in the opening. It defeats one of the objectives of playing a non-theory system when you have to know move order tricks to get a decent position from the opening.


Is there such a thing as free lunch?  Wink

OT: Well, maybe when playing me this season, because I have been self destructing in almost all games, despite of the opening ending better for me in most games.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 865
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: London system move order
Reply #14 - 03/01/16 at 11:39:49
Post Tools
fling wrote on 02/29/16 at 21:56:07:
But I fully agree, the latter seems better to meet with 2. Bf4 than 2. Nf3 in case you'd ever want to play the London.


What is being said is that Black's plan with d5,c5 and Qb6 targeting the b2 square is a strong idea, particularly with the added point that Qb3 can be met with .. c4 and after the retreat to c2 that Bf5 is possible if White hasn't played Nbd2. There isn't time to play all of c3,e3,Nbd2 and Ngf3, hence the move order.

I thought players turned to the London system to avoid having to know complex ideas in the opening. It defeats one of the objectives of playing a non-theory system when you have to know move order tricks to get a decent position from the opening.

It's useful to know that when you defend the London as if you were playing a Reti with colours reversed, that it's a defensive move order by White to delay Ngf3 and they are worried you will play d5, c5, Qb6. 
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
fling
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1583
Joined: 01/21/11
Gender: Male
Re: London system move order
Reply #13 - 02/29/16 at 21:56:07
Post Tools
The Wink was meant to indicate that there are trade-offs and that the original question was about that White shows his cards before Black has played 2...d5. Thus, op asked a valid question on why allow White the pleasure of the desired London and not use the move order to direct play in another direction, as also pointed out by the first responses. At least that is how I read the first posts.

Also, when reviving the thread, it was about 1. d4 Nf6 2. Bf4, not 1. d4 d5. But I fully agree, the latter seems better to meet with 2. Bf4 than 2. Nf3 in case you'd ever want to play the London.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RoleyPoley
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 679
Location: London
Joined: 12/29/13
Gender: Male
Re: London system move order
Reply #12 - 02/29/16 at 21:22:36
Post Tools
fling wrote on 02/29/16 at 18:09:19:
But the op asked about 1. d4 Nf6 2. Bf4. I didn't see much about 1. d4 d5  Wink


I'm not sure if this was said in jest, apologies if it was. But i think the point Equinox was perhaps meaning to make was that playing 2nf3 against 1...nf6 allows black to trick white into going into a line that is poor for white. I think Lakdawala in his book on the london gives the line Equinox uses as the reason not to play 2 nf3 after (or if so, to follow it up with 3c3 after 2...d5).


  

"As Mikhail Tal would say ' Let's have a bit of hooliganism! '"

Victor Bologan.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Equinox
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 5
Joined: 02/29/16
Re: London system move order
Reply #11 - 02/29/16 at 20:34:40
Post Tools
fling wrote on 02/29/16 at 18:09:19:
But the op asked about 1. d4 Nf6 2. Bf4. I didn't see much about 1. d4 d5  Wink


Obviously Black's light-square bishop can't reach f5 until the d-pawn is moved. But even if the game starts 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bf4, White may still wish to hold back playing Nf3 for a while because Black can play ...d5 at any time and move order White into the passive position mentioned previously.

Incidentally, Cyrus Lakdawala advocates 2.Nf3 against 1...Nf6. But in response to 2...d5 he advises White to play 3.c3 in order to avoid the move order trick. I'm not sure if it creates more problems than it solves though.  Undecided
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Equinox
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 5
Joined: 02/29/16
Re: London system move order
Reply #10 - 02/29/16 at 20:14:26
Post Tools
ArKheiN wrote on 02/29/16 at 16:43:31:
Equinox, giving 5.Nf3 "?" is too hard, 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.Qc2! but ok I still prefer 5.Nd2 if I can choose Wink.

True. Maybe a ?! was more appropriate. But either way, I would still choose 5.Nd2.  Wink
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo