Most players have faced it or played it at one time or another...but it's a very boring opening, and not particularly good for white. That position at the end is slightly better for black I would say.
Colle System
Sort:
It's actually a rather fast-paced opening. Think about it... 17 moves, and more than half of the pieces have been exchanged already. I like it for it's open ending, and tactical beginning.
Then again, you're right, this certainly isn't an opening you would play in blitz or quick games. It requires too much thinking, and is therefore boring compared to others.
Too much thinking? White plays the same set of opening moves in every game!
Generally it is my experience that white plays on autopilot until he gets to his tabiya position, he realizes he's slightly worse, and offers a draw. 
Essentially. The point of this opening system is to have a stable position that can be used against almost anything. Great opening for those who don't have time to study much.
It's an easy solution to the opening. You play the same or similar moves against most defenses, and White's early middlegame strategy is simple. That frees up one's study time to focus on more important areas like tactics!
I don't know about boring. If Black doesn't have a plan, White's thematic e4-e5 push often creates exciting kingside attacking opportunities. I actually taught this to a USCF 700 last week and she scored a quick win 11 moves into her first game using it.
Note, I don't think White gets any particular advantage out of the opening against accurate play so I wouldn't use it in must-win situations.
The QG doesn't really require much theory (except maybe 3 e4 of the QGA, but 3 Nf3 doesn't require any study) and is much sounder and simply more interesting.
Feb 10, 2009
0
#9
Elubas wrote:
The QG doesn't really require much theory (except maybe 3 e4 of the QGA, but 3 Nf3 doesn't require any study) and is much sounder and simply more interesting.
Um...really?? Since when does the Queen's Gambit not require an immense amount of theory??? And the colle isn't unsound, it just tends to lead to drawish positions against accurate defense.
Elubas wrote:
The QG doesn't really require much theory (except maybe 3 e4 of the QGA, but 3 Nf3 doesn't require any study) and is much sounder and simply more interesting.
You're insane.
And actually the Colle isn't that bad against e6 setups, but against fiancetto setups white doesn't have a chance for an advantage.
If you really don't want to play queen pawn mainlines I would suggest the Trompowsky or even the Torre attack. Both have a lot more life in them than the Colle.
I'm surprised at how much commotion this opening has already caused...
All in all, everything you guys have said is true. All I can say is that the Colle is good for club level play, and not very good past 2000.
Note: I recently learned about the Colle through a chess magazine and a lesson given by a 2100ish player.
People are usually very passionate about their hatred for the Colle and other non-mainline queen pawn opening systems. I used to hate them too until I learned how to beat them...now I love seeing them!
The best thing a player can do with his opening preparation time is learn active responses to all the annoying queen pawn openings. There are a lot of easy points to be had for the conscientious player!
Feb 11, 2009
0
#14
There is nothing wrong with the Colle and I especially advocate the C-Z (colle zukertort) infact the only problem with it is it is slightly conservative however it can be learnt like every other opening and there are times where you can shoot out of the system and take an advantage.
I agree with Elubas. There is a lot of theory in the Queen's Gambit, but it's playable without knowing much of it and tends to lead to more interesting positions than the Colle. The classical QGD is a bit dull (though less so than the Colle) but Bf4 and 0-0-0 is anything but. That line is quite theoretical, but below 2000 your opponent isn't going to have much grounding in it, and a few hours advance study should set you up okay. My experience with the line is that if both players go into it with little theoretical knowledge, White tends to come out much better - it's Black that needs to be booked up here. My own results have improved dramatically since I dropped the Colle - that said, I don't particularly enjoy playing against it.
Feb 11, 2009
0
#16
ericmittens wrote:
Most players have faced it or played it at one time or another...but it's a very boring opening, and not particularly good for white. That position at the end is slightly better for black I would say.
Yes, and quite passive opening as well.Probably slighly better position for black,if considerating bishop pair.
Feb 11, 2009
0
#17
I'd recommend the Colle if you like quiet. I don't think I'd play it for the money in a tourney. Might be bad for your own nervous system. And, I'm declining comment on the silly statement that QG doesn't require much theory. [pun intended.]
JPF917> I don't think I'd play it for the money in a tourney.
I would have no qualms about doing that. If my opponent is much higher-rated, a draw is fine in such circumstances. It would be lovely to have a solid position, a tempo up, where they have to take substantial risks or try to grind me in the endgame to win.
Rabutai - I posted this exact question last month, feel free to read the responses:
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/colle-system2
Have you ever heard of it? Here's one variation:
I like this opening for its secureness for White.