Hey all,

Recently I've been a little frustrated using 1.e4 because of the sheer volume of theory one has to amassed against many different defence systems. I'm thinking of switching to 1.d4 however without an early 2.c4. (Again, this is because of I don't wish to encounter main stream theory so early on) Currently I'm reading a book on the colle system and the colle-zukertort system, both of which seem to be quite playable and easy to play.

My question to the chess.com community is.. which of the minor 1.d4 systems do you prefer and why? I would esp like to hear any debates on london systems vs colle systems.

Thanks everyone!

There's always the Blackmar-Diemer gambit too......

Many years ago I played the Colle (Koltanowski).  It is solid (slav with colors reversed).  I know that the ideal black set up entailed black king bishop at g7 and queens knight at (if memory serves) at d7.  I then noticed that the black set-up did not work quite as well against a reversed Dutch(?) so I would alter moves holdin off development on my kings knight until black commited his Queen knight at which time I would play f4 and develop the knight to f3.  Now there is whites Zukertort of which I am not familiar.

Just remember that you have several other openings that can come out of d4,e3 and if 1.d4,d5, 2.Nf3, Nf6 you can play 3.c4 returning to Queens Gambit lines.