Countering the London System

Black pushes c4 and White plays Rb1

We have ... in these specific lines an edge for White ... (I'm heading into middle game territory with this analysis. Black has not refuted anything.. nor established an initiative. Black, in some lines around this point can establish a theoretical equality... IMO Not a practical equality... If Black was relying on 3..c5 to give a pull on the Queen side .. Black in dealing with these complications is defiantly going to soak up some time on the clock if they have not seen these before.

just my 2 cents...

its ahhh not very good

Nice

Is 1. g6 ok to avoid lines with 1... f5 2. Bg5 2. g4 2. e4 and such but i could try learning another dutch? The problem is i like 1. g6 and 2. Nf6 against 1. d4 2. c4 setups as i love grunfeld and kid, but not vs london and stuff, so i wanna avoid them. I also love the Dutch Defence but the problem is tricky gambits and 2. Nc3 3. e4

I play 1... d5 against d4 and I also struggled to find something interesting against the zuckertort as a whole, especially the London. I know about c5/Qb6 but everyone plays that, I want to attack the lazy attitude of the London player and force him to think about something... I remained unsatisfied until I explored 2... c5. I like everything in this line, but especially what it does to the London. Infact, most London players won't play the London here, they'll go for 3. c4 or 3. c3 -

These f6 lines also pair well with a nice f6 line in the accelerated london -

And if white tries to reach a delayed london with c3... you can actually just avoid it entirely and play a slav exchange -

here is a super easy antidote

by no means exhausting the number of playable sidelines for white but basically, black gets the arguably more pleasant side of equality with very natural play. for example, in the main line above, black will 0-0, go rb8 and go b5 and a5 starting a minority attack. White is equal but i dont even know what will his play aim for other than trying to neutralize blacks play.

Another simple counter to the London is to simply bring your queen bishop to a6, after White develops his king bishop to d3 - offering a trade of bishops.

Make the trade unavoidable, and all the wind will suck out of White's sails, once his prized LSB is gone.

I often like to combine this with a Black pawn on d6, which takes away another source of fun for White: the e5 square, which White usually likes to use as an outpost for his knight.

For example:

one thing i would recommend agaisnt is playing the position like a queen's indian. While the engine has no issue playing this way you are asking for trouble for two reasons

1. agaisnt a d4-c4 setup, control of the e4 square is vital in the QID but in the london, e4 is just another square . Black cant damage white's pawn structure and f3 later is on possible so aiming for an e4 stronghold is basically your pieces "ice-skating" with no purpose

2, black will play developing moves but by move 10 he soon runs out of them and will likely have to play d5 (d6 just prolongs the indecision and white can take his sweet time setting up), problem is, d5 and nf6 means, white has super easy access to e5 with moves like ne5 and nd2-nf3. often the best black can do in reply is offer trades to try to get f6 going.

here is another line i recommend if encountering the london via 1.d4 nf6 2.bf4

@Post #29

I think the move for White is 3.c3.

If 3.e3 + the trade, The White position transposes into an Exchange Caro Kan which is still Fine for White.

However, It stirs game away from a 1.d4 line and more into a 1.e4 line.

If the Exchange line is played like in the diagram, Than White needs to play 6.Bd3.

It’s not an idea Bishop trade for white, but White can’t leave Black Bishop in such a good post.

i found this line of forum discussions very in lightning - mind you some of it was a little over my head -- i did see where you where going with this topic and at least that was something -- thanks for submitting a good topic and presentation i really enjoyed it

If you are afraid of the London system, you need to study it.

There is nothing to be afraid of.

I'm scared of it. Not the one with 2. Nc3 though, the Jobava. That's rather anti-positional. Telling someone they only need to study the most complex of all openings is a bit of a tall order. Admittedly, many don't know how to play it but Magnus plays it.

5. Qb3 is a bad move. So is 4. c3.

That's just a trap though. I don't actually play the London but that game should go 1. d4 ...e6 2. Nf3. The point of the London is that it's highly transpositional. White uses options..

White is playing a series of bad moves. But 2. Bf4 isn't an Accelerated London: it's simply a better move order. In similar positions, white develops and isn't in a hurry to waste a move with c3. White shouldn't play Bg3 imo.

>says it's a trap

>there's no trap

>what could he have meant by this?

5.qb3 in my database has been played 179 times among master games, 5.qc2 has been played 12 times. The engine gives no preference . Black can play almost identically since bd3 can be with c5-c4 and black will go nc6 g6 bg7 and bf5. Either white goes to qb3 and transposes a tempo down or goes qc1 which is no encouraging sight. The alternative is for white to play dxc5 but this already gives black the advantage.

a case can be made that 4.nf3 is better than 4.c3 but the thing is, the kind of player who plays the london wants a system, after 4.nf3 qb6, white must play nc3 which i addressed as a sideline, black should play bd7! which scores quite well among master games outscoring black significantly. White no longer has his precious london formation. Either way my promise remains the same. Black gets the more pleasant side of equality at a minimum .

In fact, the only other that looks playable is the virtually never seen 5.c4! which also takes white away from his precious system. I also seriously wonder how many london players are comfortable with the dynamic complications of gambitting the b2 pawn

Yes I accept the systematic nature of it. There was a local rapidplay yesterday. I didn't play because I was tired but called in and it made me want to play again. On board two, Mike Surtees, whom I've known for ages, was facing a London in round 4. He made it really complex, playing d5, Bf5, prophylactic Bg6, e6, c5, Nh6, Nf5 not necessarily in that exact order. He was unusual because he played 100 games per year and yet his rating was 2280 FIDE equivalent for years and never deviated more than 10 or 20 points. I need to ask someone how it ended.