Latest Updates:
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) torre vs london (Read 12285 times)
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2443
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: torre vs london
Reply #21 - 09/02/17 at 16:42:30
Post Tools
Contrary to some opinion in this thread, I actually think that the Torre and London are quite different. In the Torre white is using the bishopto fight for the e4 and d5 squares, whereas in the London he is not. Many lines of the Torre see White surrendering the two bishops to force through and early e4 push, which can even give the game a sort of Sicilian flavor.  They're quite different openings; only in the lines where Black plays an early ...d5 and ...e6 do they seem very similar, in my opinion.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TN
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 3420
Joined: 11/07/08
Gender: Male
Re: torre vs london
Reply #20 - 09/01/17 at 02:12:21
Post Tools
I don't fully understand what point Avatar is trying to make, so I'll address the initial question more deeply.

One tip I can give is that you may consider adding 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.c4 e6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e3 to give your Torre repertoire a bit more bite, as you could also reach it from 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.Bg5 d5 4.e3 Be7 5.c4 - you'd be surprised how many Queen's Indian players end up here at club level!

It's true that the Torre isn't as fashionable as the London, but the principle is quite similar to the London - get the pieces out, don't leave any weaknesses, stay flexible depending on what they do.

I'm not sure I 100% agree with the cons - I heard Palliser's Torre book was quite good, though I don't have it for myself. As for the light-squared bishop, you can say it belongs on d3 if they aren't playing ...g6/...d6/...e5 stuff. For the ...g6 lines, one can consider the e3/c3 setup played by Eljanov not so long ago - I agree that the position from the Carlsen-Cheparinov game feels a tad easier for Black to handle.

As I noted before, you can mix systems to avoid problem lines, so you may find 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 to be a good complement to 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6/g6 3.Bg5. For transpositions, note that 2...c5 3.e3 cxd4 4.exd4 transposes to the Caro-Kann Exchange with 4.Bf4.
  

All our dreams come true if we have the courage to pursue them.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Avatar
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


Do or do not there is
no try!

Posts: 18
Joined: 01/14/15
Re: torre vs london
Reply #19 - 08/31/17 at 20:33:35
Post Tools
an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 08/31/17 at 16:21:47:
Avatar wrote on 08/31/17 at 08:45:38:
... what is the use of a good position at the opening when we can not handle properly the other stages of the game.

If your opponent resigns in the opening, you won't lose in the middlegame or endgame.

As you said he must resign but these days none won a game that he resign... and good players know that Smiley
There are many examples,believe me.....
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
Senior Member
****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 493
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: torre vs london
Reply #18 - 08/31/17 at 16:21:47
Post Tools
Avatar wrote on 08/31/17 at 08:45:38:
... what is the use of a good position at the opening when we can not handle properly the other stages of the game.

If your opponent resigns in the opening, you won't lose in the middlegame or endgame.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bondefanger
Junior Member
**
Online


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 63
Location: Copenhagen
Joined: 04/02/04
Re: torre vs london
Reply #17 - 08/31/17 at 12:05:55
Post Tools
CanadianClub wrote on 08/31/17 at 08:06:37:
Of course, going to blindly learn a bunch of moves in a tree-structure without understanding them, is one of the reasons people are not getting better than they are. Including myself some years ago.


But also of course: faced with the task of trying to memorize an overwhelming number of moves, we can do so by trying to make sense of them.

Learning something can often take the route of learning "that" first, and "why" later.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Avatar
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


Do or do not there is
no try!

Posts: 18
Joined: 01/14/15
Re: torre vs london
Reply #16 - 08/31/17 at 08:45:38
Post Tools
It is already told that "blindly learn" without understanding is a bad choice and this is a way to play other openings also and not just London.
Edit:Anyway knowing only opening theory is a bad habit and I thing it is obvious especially for the amateurs who anyway,they have not the knowledge of a GM.
For example good endgame practice (and winning endgames) is not related with openings.
In other words what is the use of a good position at the opening when we can not handle properly the other stages of the game.

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



Posts: 3420
Joined: 11/07/08
Gender: Male
Re: torre vs london
Reply #15 - 08/31/17 at 08:24:09
Post Tools
I agree with the principle that playing the exact same thing every game is limiting on several levels, but there may be merit in learning the different versions of the e3/d4/c3 structure - with the London, Torre, Colle or Stonewall depending on what the opponent does (and one's mood). An example could be:

1.d4 d5 2.Bf4
1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.Bg5
1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.e3
1.d4 e6 2.e3 Nf6 3.Bd3 d5 4.f4

  

All our dreams come true if we have the courage to pursue them.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
CanadianClub
Senior Member
****
Offline


Greetings from Catalonia!

Posts: 352
Joined: 11/11/12
Gender: Male
Re: torre vs london
Reply #14 - 08/31/17 at 08:06:37
Post Tools
At 1726 elo you have to know what to play and how. Call it theory, call it whatever... But if you play the Colle/London/Torre complex as White you have to know some plans and where put your pieces depending on Black's answers... Is it theory? I think so.

Of course, going to blindly learn a bunch of moves in a tree-structure without understanding them, is one of the reasons people are not getting better than they are. Including myself some years ago.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Avatar
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


Do or do not there is
no try!

Posts: 18
Joined: 01/14/15
Re: torre vs london
Reply #13 - 08/31/17 at 07:15:03
Post Tools
ErictheRed wrote on 08/30/17 at 15:04:56:
  It really depends on Black's specific reaction, though, as how Black arranges his pawns dictates much of the play.  Call me crazy, but I think that a lot of books or videos push these systems as "easy to play" or with "typical plans" or whatever for White, when in fact I think the opposite is true.  Maybe if Black plays ...d5, ...e6, and ...c5 White can stick to all his normal moves, but what if Black plays 1...Nf6 and 2...c5?  What about 1...Nf6 and 2...d6?  Or 1...Nf6, 2...g6, not committing the central pawns yet? 

Anyway white must be aware of the   plans and to choose, Playing d4,c3,e3 etc without thinging is rather not so good.
Also opening theory may  not to be the first choice to learn  a   chess player with less than 1726 rating...  Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Straggler
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 261
Location: London
Joined: 08/09/09
Re: torre vs london
Reply #12 - 08/30/17 at 19:40:38
Post Tools
You mean I might get to 1726 if I played the London instead of the Ruy Lopez and the Open Sicilian?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2443
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: torre vs london
Reply #11 - 08/30/17 at 15:04:56
Post Tools
Surely the main point is that the bishop is controlling different diagonals and squares, and hence different plans for White are more/less attractive?  In some Torre lines White can fight for rapid control of e4 for instance, which he can't do in the London. 

It really depends on Black's specific reaction, though, as how Black arranges his pawns dictates much of the play.  Call me crazy, but I think that a lot of books or videos push these systems as "easy to play" or with "typical plans" or whatever for White, when in fact I think the opposite is true.  Maybe if Black plays ...d5, ...e6, and ...c5 White can stick to all his normal moves, but what if Black plays 1...Nf6 and 2...c5?  What about 1...Nf6 and 2...d6?  Or 1...Nf6, 2...g6, not committing the central pawns yet?  I'm actually of the opinion that to play these openings well, White has to be a strong enough player to understand when to go into various pawn formations and needs to understand a wide variety of plans, etc. 

Frankly, 1.d4 and 2.c4 seems "more conceptual in terms of plans, strategies and similar pawn formations" to me.  The fact that it has more theory attached to it simply means that it represents more testing play, and many more high-level games exist.  You don't actually have to know all that "theory" to play it well--at least I don't believe that you have to know substantially more than you do in the London or Torre or whatever else, assuming you don't want to be one of those people who play the same system moves over and over and over and wonder why their rating never goes above 1726.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Avatar
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


Do or do not there is
no try!

Posts: 18
Joined: 01/14/15
Re: torre vs london
Reply #10 - 08/29/17 at 12:46:47
Post Tools
Mtal wrote on 02/12/14 at 21:21:17:
How would you comepare the two? Would you play one over the other vs certain openings? Seems to me the London is good vs g6 stuff but the torre shines against e6 lines. Well maybe the London is more complete but like to hear the opinions of more experienced players. Thanks.

I thing torre is playable with g6 ideas and white can try e4 (if the black pawn is not at d5).Then black can play d6 with e5 or c5.
Also with Bf4 against the g6 ideas you can play c4 and play the KID.
I thing pure London is best playing against d5 (1.d4 d5 Bf4 as aronian played against Kasparov at SL) and play c4  with  other defences or the torre.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 838
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: torre vs london
Reply #9 - 12/20/16 at 10:08:05
Post Tools
TD wrote on 12/19/16 at 18:53:46:
Which of the two is more conceptual in terms of plans, strategies and similar pawn formations?



As someone who defends against both these with the same system, I see little difference with only the placing of the Bishop on g5 or f4 being different. On g5 it can provoke or allow h6 and g5, whilst on f4 there's scope for marking time with h3 and Bh2 before White runs out of standard moves.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TD
Senior Member
****
Offline


Feyenoord forever!

Posts: 399
Location: Rotterdam, NLD
Joined: 02/12/11
Re: torre vs london
Reply #8 - 12/19/16 at 18:53:46
Post Tools
Which of the two is more conceptual in terms of plans, strategies and similar pawn formations?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Pcal
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 24
Joined: 11/04/13
Gender: Male
Re: torre vs london
Reply #7 - 01/16/15 at 19:39:27
Post Tools
Kylemeister..

I think they are close as far as positional richness goes (London and the Torre)  Played both.

g6 lines I like the London better (just my preference)
e6 lines I like the Torre.

sub g6 with e6 in your last post and you said what I would say about the London Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4481
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: torre vs london
Reply #6 - 01/16/15 at 18:04:47
Post Tools
But of course 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.c4 also allows 3...c6 and 3...dc, and tends not to lead to the best sort of QGD Exchange ...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
hicetnunc
Full Member
***
Offline


"Do something scary every
day"

Posts: 195
Location: Paris, France
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: torre vs london
Reply #5 - 01/16/15 at 17:45:33
Post Tools
I've been playing the Torre attack in conjonction with the the QGD Exchange (1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.c4 rather than 3.Bg5) for ~2 years against 1800-2200 competition with good results.

Curiously, I was rather reticent to play the Torre at first, but I've had very good results with it (perf. ~my elo+100).

IMO, here are the pros and cons of the Torre :

Pros :
- good suprise value - it's pretty rare, and even fairly strong players don't have much prepared against it
- there's no clearcut antidote : many equalizing lines but maybe no clear best line - besides, many of the antidotes leave a lot of material on the board
- it lends itself either to slow positional (Petrosian, Trifunovic) or fairly aggressive interpretations (Yusupov)

Cons :
- I found it difficult to find my way in the opening, as there's no good book guide available ; you really need to experiment and slowly come to grips with the opening ; besides the handling of the bishops is pretty difficult
- it requires to slowly become familiar with many different pawn structures
- the systems with ...g6 are pretty challenging, and, in general, easier to play for the black player

I've never played the London, but I have a clubmate who plays it. My feeling is that it's less rich than the Torre, and doesn't have the same surprise value. It's more inflexible too, but it looks like it's much easier to play.
  

43 yo, 2000 elo
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Pcal
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 24
Joined: 11/04/13
Gender: Male
Re: torre vs london
Reply #4 - 01/16/15 at 15:30:13
Post Tools
Both are fine. 

What is the difference between a main line opening that you play on a regular basis and one of these systems?
  Nothing if you don't vary your opening play. Nothing if you don't look for new ideas, Nothing if you don't take the time to find out what people are playing against your opening... I.e. nothing if you don't do your prep.   The notion that somehow any opening system (one that's not been refuted of course) effects your chess technique i.e. command of the middle game and end game) IMO is bogus (Touted by players who strive at all cost to win the game in the opening phase... lol And who despise players who play systems, i.e. Usually because they weren't allowed to play their booked up pet line...  These types almost rage when you defeat them using a system... lol   Grin  )  I have a serious plus core using the London against KID. The London is not the best to meet the KID, but for me... I know the positions really well and my plus score gives me a sociological boost.
At my level...2100 USCF Somehow that shows up in OTB.

Both Torre and the London systems are good if you vary them with other openings. Currently I play the London about 50% of the time and  essay 1. d4 and 2. c4  the other 50%

There is a solid argument that anything below 2400 level the opening as long as it's solid doesn't matter. One has to consider a very small amount of chess players reach that level of proficiency... let alone GM.

IMO that makes systems totally doable. And even above the 2400 level... There are IM's and GM's  that have made a name for themselves playing these systems.. 

I say (if ya want)  play a system and study the other facets of the game.. Some go wrong because they don't study the system looking for new ideas.

A chess site like this comes in handy... You get new ideas and the latest evaluations even on systems such as the London or Torre


But with whatever you do... don't start chasing openings.. 
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Avatar
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


Do or do not there is
no try!

Posts: 18
Joined: 01/14/15
Re: torre vs london
Reply #3 - 01/15/15 at 05:06:23
Post Tools
Aagard wrote at a book,he is happy when his lower rating opponent plays such openings but this is the point.
A better player can overplay at the middle game the opponnent.
also a club player  who has not time to read theory,he may use time to time such openings with little theory to know depending to his style.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 838
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: torre vs london
Reply #2 - 01/15/15 at 00:52:00
Post Tools
Avatar wrote on 01/14/15 at 21:48:27:
I do not like london system,so Torre will be my choice especially for lower rated players in case I want to avoid heir preparation.


Is their any great difference for the defender?

I would use a reverse Reti or a pseudo-Hedgehog regardless of whether the Bishop is on g5 or f4.

In the reverse Reti from left to right, you go Nf6, g6, Bg7, 0-0, d6, Nbd7,c5, b6, Bb7. You then have some options as to squares for the Queen and Rooks. Giving the Bishop a kick with  .. h6 can sometimes be useful.

In the pseudo-Hedgehog you have Nf6, e6, Be7, 0-0, d6, Nbd7, c5, b6, Bb7

Grandmasters like Hebden are able to squeeze regardless, otherwise I don't think either White set up (Bg5/f4) is particularly dangerous.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Avatar
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


Do or do not there is
no try!

Posts: 18
Joined: 01/14/15
Re: torre vs london
Reply #1 - 01/14/15 at 21:48:27
Post Tools
I do not like london system,so Torre will be my choice especially for lower rated players in case I want to avoid heir preparation
Also I thing torre is not so good at 1.d5 lines as mentioned at some book.so maybe colle with b3 etc  a choice then.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Mtal
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 143
Joined: 05/15/07
torre vs london
02/12/14 at 21:21:17
Post Tools
How would you comepare the two? Would you play one over the other vs certain openings? Seems to me the London is good vs g6 stuff but the torre shines against e6 lines. Well maybe the London is more complete but like to hear the opinions of more experienced players. Thanks.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo