You're still fundamentally cramped and the f6 knight isn't that great. Play slowly and white definitely gets an edge.

LC0/SF on a very quick look actually think black can get away with 5 Bd2 e4!?. There is a risk that that makes something drop off but it isn't obvious.

LC0 just wants 5 Bg5 instead, to make sure of getting e4 in for white. Its happy then. It really, really likes space.

1 d4 Nf6 2 Bf4 c5 3 d5 d6 4 Nc3 e5 5.Bd2

Why are people saying this is such a great option for Black? Playable maybe, but I would take White, he should have a normal opening edge as much as any other opening (IMO)

fjd wrote on 01/26/18 at 00:38:43:
I agree with your exclam. This is how Aronian played it. 5.Bd2 in reply does not impress me at all. It's worth mentioning this was a blitz game. 

fjd wrote on 01/26/18 at 00:38:43:
I know about this one. I have taken such poisoned pawns, only if I am sure my opponent has not analyzed beforehand. Sometimes it has worked out, sometimes I have been punished. 

fjd wrote on 01/26/18 at 00:38:43:
1.d4 c5 2.d5 Nf6 3.Nc3 e6 4.e4 exd5 5.e5! += (at least) is a theme I have played for white. My idea was 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bf4 c5 3.d5 Qa5+!? 4.Bd2 Qb6 5.Nc3 e6 6.e4 exd5 7.e5 Qe6 unclear. Also after the simple 7.exd5 it is hard to assess Qb6 vs Bd2. That is what I was curious about.

semper_fidelis wrote on 01/25/18 at 11:16:18:
Trompowsky players do good business with 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5 Ne4 3.Bf4 c5 4.d5. The question is, in the London version, has black gained or lost a tempo? It could be argued both ways. But if white plays f2-f3 in the London, black has saved a clear tempo.

1.d4 Nf6 2.Bf4 c5 3.d5 Qa5+!? I am curious about this move.

Scarblac wrote on 01/24/18 at 13:22:34:


Now there's a question. Why do players not start 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 if intending this system? I suppose that enables Black to avoid committing himself to a fianchetto. 

I'm wondering whether the accurate move order is 1. d4 Nf6 2. Bf4 c5. If you are facing an old style London player, they are going to play 3. e3 or 3. c3. If they aren't, maybe defending a Bf4 Benoni or Benko after 3. d5 is preferable to having to defend against a 150 Attack or having to use a .. d5 system. 

I absolutely love Dembo's book, but it only covers the London with early Nf3 (and uses ...d6 lines), it doesn't cover 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bf4 g6 3.Nc3 which I see a lot recently.

grandpatzer wrote on 01/23/18 at 18:15:48:



If you want to play this way, i.e. trying to avoid d5, then you will allow transposition into the Pirc.

This repertoire is fully covered in Kornev's practical repetoire, if you like the Pirc, however he does go for lines without the d6/Nf6 against some d4 special lines.

e.g. The Tromp causes you problems, but can be avoided by going 1. ..d6, again allowing the Pirc.

• Gallagher (1996) Beating the Anti-King's Indians, I thought was pretty good, and mostly stuck with ...d6. I would not be afraid to play his lines even after all this time, but would expect a few bruises here and there.
• Dembo (2008) Fighting The Anti-King's Indians, I do not have, but Lou Mercuri recommended it, and wrote: "King’s Indian players are provided with a …d6 repertoire against the London, Torre, and kingside fianchetto, and can be satisfied with active play in all of the suggested lines." http://www.masschess.org/chess_horizons/book_review/book_review_details.aspx?boo... I do not remember Lou as a King's Indian player, but no doubt some of his students are.