Colle-Zukertort>London/Jobava London.

Thank you for the post. This has been a great conversation.

I plan to learn and play the Colle Zukertort next. The intent behind my question was to know if there are deviations that forces the Zukertort to transpose to another opening or system. I would like to include that in my study as well.

I tried playing this opening a few months ago because I liked its aggressive nature but I lacked the understanding of the moves and was lost in the middle game when I ran into deviations.

Thank you all for the many examples above, I will include them in my study notes.

I need clarification on what deviations. A pgn or board will do.

For both Bf5 and Bg4: When the light-squared bishop goes to f5 or g4 then it’s the c4 line/positional line where you punish black for taking out the bishop weakening the light squares in the queen side therefore going for normal queen’s gambit development+Qb3 targeting the pawn on b7 and the diagonal from b3 to g8 which helps the c4 pawn. For Bg4: If your opponent does this then you have another move, but I don’t like so much is the h3 g4 line and you go Ne5 targeting the bishop and centralizing with space for the queen on the d1-h5 diagonal. Please note that when the word punish is used it does not mean it is the worst move, but it is hard to explain here.

https://youtu.be/ZjLDyMr1OOU?si=Efp5xQWChimeRgMQ

It is part one of the series about the Colle-Zukertort from chessbrah/Aman Hamilton(no Eric Hansen:( ) and you will learn alot about this opening and also a bit of mid and endgames.

Just because white won in post 2 does not mean he should have. White actually gets nothing if he insists on Colle moves against the Anti-Colle. The Anti-Colle is where Black brings the Bishop out to f5 or g4. When Black does that, if White wants anything and doesn't wish to give Black complete equality or even a small edge by move 4, he must play c4 against any Bf5 or Bg4 development.

If the bishop is blocked behind the pawn chain, like 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 e6 4.Bd3 c5, then 5.b3 can work out really well. You can often get a slight edge against the prepared and a quick win against the unprepared. But if Black brings the Bishop out, like 3...Bf5 or 3...Bg4, then White must go for 4.c4 otherwise he has ZIPPO, ZILCH, NADA, ZERO!

All you need to do to fix that is learn the slow slav along with the colle zukertort.

I mean the jobava london and london system are not really similar so its a little unfair the group them together

"Jobava London" is a misnomer by Chess.com and a few people. It is simply the Jobava Attack. It is a totally different opening. It would be like saying the "Barry London".

The London System is Nf3 and Bf4, the other knight goes to d2. The development of the f3-knight is often delayed in modern times.

The Jobava Attack sees Bf4 and Nc3 with no early Nf3 development.

The Barry Attack sees both Nc3 and Nf3 along with Bf4.

Jobava london is used synonymously with Jobava attack.

thats like saying the Volga gambit is a wrong name and that the benko gambit is the correct way. Theres no rulebook on opening names, as long as a group of people know what you are talking about then the name works.

No, the difference is the Volga Gambit is the named used in many countries outside the US. Similar to Scandinavian vs Center-Counter.

But the Jobava London truly is a misnomer, just like how the French people have nothing to do with the e6-Sicilian.

You can reach the Jobava via the London by playing Nc3 in various places... a variety of anti-sicilians against e6 also can transpose into a french, most notably the alapin. Likewise there are sidelines in the horwitz and the french that can transpose into a french sicilian.

You may have an opinion on how the opening names should work, but when we look at alternative ways your opinion seems to be basically arbitrary. With openings I don't see much coherent unifying principle other than "what's popular"