Hello everyone!, I'm new to this forums and already asking for your help. I've been playing "informal" chess for some years now, but only recently started studying openings more seriously.

 I have this bloodthirsty rivalry with my brother in law who is a slightly weaker player than me, yet extremely aggressive. Somehow since the day I learned the Sicilian defense, he quit on king pawn openings and as white always plays queen pawn ones.

He mostly plays intuitive lines; but lately he’s been obsessed with an early Bishop on f4 on his 2^nd move. I’ve red much about the apparent weakness of developing bishops before knights, and I also know that Nc3 in a queen pawn opening for white is rather inappropriate due to the stuck c pawn. However I don’t seem to find a decent or dynamic refutation to: 1d4…. 2 Bf4…..3 f3……4 c3……

Those moves will be most certainly his first 4 in every game as white and still I get stuck defending.  You can see the moves I tried today and they led me to failure so there must be better options out there.

Should I play something like the “London system” line? With 1 d4-f6 ; 2 Bf4-e6 3 f3-c5

What about the Dutch opening? Since he dislikes the Sicilian…maybe 1 d4-f5 will tempt him to go for my king too early.

 Thanx in advance and sorry for the length of this message.

 

 

The only real 'weakness' in developing bishops before knights is the comittment.  Instead of thinking about rules of thumb, consider the actual point of the moves he's playing.  He owns e5.  That's his square.  I don't really like 3...e6.  It doesn't seem to do anything for you.  You should be actively working toward a goal.

If he likes to play the London system you should be happy, it's a crap opening!

Find an article or book on how to gain a good position as black and look forward to many victories.

Well, 2...Nc6 is the most popular reply. The second most popular, and scoring a bit better, is 2...c5. This move seems to make sense to me, and is a move I could definitely see myself making. I don't see the sense much in 3...c6. The light-squared bishop has not committed to an attack on the King, and Bb5+ could be dealt with when it happened. It is definitely not worth the tempo worrying about it on your 3rd move. There is also no reason to worry about getting your Queen out on the 3rd move. Spend your time developing your minor pieces first. 3...c5 still makes sense, or you could go for a kingside fianchetto with 3...g6. If you can work on loosening his grip on the e5 square, it will make his opening moves look silly. Also, have you tried the Indian defense (1...Nf6)? If he still goes for 2.Bf4, you might be able to find a better follow up than the plan of an early ...d5. After 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bf4, 2...g6, 2...e6, 2...c5, and 2...d6, all score very well.

ericmittens wrote:

If he likes to play the London system you should be happy, it's a crap opening!

Find an article or book on how to gain a good position as black and look forward to many victories.

---

 No it's not. I've beaten some fairly high rated players with it myself.

neneko wrote: ericmittens wrote:

If he likes to play the London system you should be happy, it's a crap opening!

Find an article or book on how to gain a good position as black and look forward to many victories.

---

 No it's not. I've beaten some fairly high rated players with it myself.

---

 

agreed, its not a "crap" opening; its just not as "sharp" as some other openings. <ericmittens> in what way is the london system crap? Your talking as if its refuted. Its a solid set-up for white, and while I don't play it myself due to its "less-ambitious" feel, Its hardly "crap".

Thanx to all for your answers. I've tried the kingside fianchetto (indian?) before and it works fairly well for me. however I tend to loose some space in the middle and have a hard time opening my position.

I've been looking over the options on the board, and c5 seems interesting. I'll try something arround that line.

 We'll probably play again tomorrow so I'll let you know how it turns out.

try the nizo-indian defense.  the key in that opening is to get your knight to e4 (or so i've read)  my experience tends to support that it's a very nice defense

It's a crap opening in that it offers white no chance of an advantage. As black I am always very happy to see it.

Moving your Knight to h5 early a few times will scare him out of that opening.  If moves the bishop to g5 bring your bishop e2 and initiate the trade. 

 

ericmittens, doesn't this thread bring back bad memories of the vote chess game with GM Davies?  For some reason when I read this post I thought of the debate surrounding 3...Bc4 and how you and I were vehemently opposed and ultimately had zero impact changing the minds of anyone.  I couldn't take it, I had to leave the team after a couple more votes.

Gonnosuke!

 

Yea I'm still hanging around the GM Davies game because he happens to be playing my pet opening as white and I want to see him destroy those guys

 

I dont see how anyone can like "systems" like the London/Colle/Torre/KIA...playing the same moves against everything would be so boring! The only thing white ever has to think about would be when to offer the draw!

 

 

ericmittens, you should play some chess outside the internet. Might give you some healthy new experiences with new openings.

Try this: 1 d4  Nf6

              2. Bf4  d5

              3. Nf3  c5

              4. c3  Qb6 with good pressure on d4 and b2. 

This post may be AFTER you play your rematch, but I was wondering what you would think . . . First, I have used a few openings and studied the opening in general, but I don't tend to study lines like alot of people do, so take what I am going to say with a grain of salt.  I personally don't see what the significance is with him bringing his bishop out that way--it is focused on the queen side, and it is not like you are obligated to play through an exchange at e5.  If you are concerned with his bishop, I might suggest . . . 1) d4    e6

                                                                     2) Bf4  Bd6

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm sure this is an unorthodox response, but then again, isn't his?  I think that is what is giving you a problem anyway--he is playing an opening outside the standard openings so it is harder to use a standard opening to counter!  Why not "fight fire with fire," and use a more direct, aggressive AND UNORTHODOX response?!  I'd be interested to hear back what you think whether you use it or not . . . Good hunting!

Neneko:

You should read my blog, I play in OTB tournaments regularly

Beane: I've heard about the nimzo-indian but have never tried it before. I'll give it a try later on. First I should take a look at it and watch some example games. 

Gonnosuke: The H5 knight didnt sound good at first... But Iv'e been looking over it on the board and after 4- Bg5 - Be7; 5- Bxe7-Qxe7, I'm free for castle and my queen is on a good square. The bad knight can allways return to f6 safely in case I need to.

Clavius: Yours is probably the most orthodox idea. It sounds prety solid, yet still bears the problem of an early queen development. However I like the offensive look on it.

 Celestialknight: My rematch is today, so you brought it up just in time. Let me tell you.. it IS scary to double pawns so early but still I like it a lot. I may not want to try this on stronger players, but it may trouble him a lot. The worst part for me will be my locked white bishop. Since the only choice seems to fianchetto it and considering I'll have to push d5 for a decent pawn structure, the bishop will get jammed for some time.

 Hey.. while writing this I've been trying more possible counters for white in this position and found something rather terrifying. After 3- Bxd6 - cxd6 He can't block me  immediately  pushing d5, because of 4- d5-Qa5+ (threatening d5) ; 5-Kc3-kf6 and d5 pawn looks lost. However.. and this is the ugly part... he can play 4-e4....  forcing me to keep my weak pawn in d6. I can't find any decent counterplay with black on this position and white has an open game.

Anyway... I apreciate the unorthodox ideas but this one turned out a little risky until I find a way to counter 4-e4....

 

As you can see.. if I play 4- .... d5 then 5-exd5- exd5 and I have double isolated epawns. If I play 4-..... e5 then 5- d5.... and all my queenside pieces are blocked.

 anyway, thanx again for taking your time on helping me!

Hello again, I ment to write before, but haven't had the time. I've played several matches against him since my last message here and tried some of your advices as black.

My first try was Gonnosuke's advice with knight to h5. It confused him so bad... I got clear advantage early on. He didn't however go for Bg5, but tried to defend the bishop with Qd2. After that I just exchanged bishops and then attacked his queen over and over winning tempos and development. It worked so well I used it again 3 times and won them all.

 I also tried c5 twice and won both games too. One of them in arround 17 moves.

Anyway. We must have played about 15 games this week and I only lost 1 to horrible mistakes. Thanx for your ideas... he's now more frustrated than ever  :)

Just so you know. I'm not the kind of person who takes games too personal; but if you knew this guy you'd understand.

Good stuff!!

ericmittens wrote:
It's a crap opening in that it offers white no chance of an advantage. As black I am always very happy to see it.

---

 It offers black a very dull game, with very little dynamic play. I dread seeing this opening when a win is needed against a better opponent. Yes, of course black has less problem than in other openings, but you can't judge away an opening merely on that; the London system is a solid "low-risk" opening.

A very strong chess player/trainer once told me: "there are no bad (crap) openings, only bad (crap) chess players."  This statement has stayed with me for many years and I think there is a lot of truth to this statement.