Is London a beginner opening?

Sort:
Avatar of PhiloSepehr

As I get better at chess, maybe London isn't what I need to play.
Should I attempt other openings or is London still good?

Avatar of chessterd5

You should always study other openings for your own knowledge. But play what you like. The only purpose of an opening is to get you to a position that you like to play.

Avatar of OnTheRunFromCubanPolice

London is being used at highest levels even. I wouldn't call it a beginner opening just because beginners are using it in a way that screams "beginner".

It wouldn't hurt to look at newer stuff however. Or just deepen your knowledge of London. It will hold.

Avatar of PedroG1464
PhiloSepehr wrote:

As I get better at chess, maybe London isn't what I need to play.
Should I attempt other openings or is London still good?

The London has “beginner” written on its name. Simple, solid, and somewhat boring.

You should definitely check out other openings, though. See what fits you.

Avatar of jazzzy004

Use whatever works

Avatar of DrSpudnik

It was an old duffer's opening when I was a kid some 45 or so years ago.

Avatar of Flameus1110
The London is a good beginner opening, but I think it slightly worsens long-term development due to the moves being a little systematic
Avatar of Medusa_Stan
Flameus1110 wrote:
The London is a good beginner opening, but I think it slightly worsens long-term development due to the moves being a little systematic

As someone who only plays London I would sort of agree and disagree at the same time. While the opening moves are pretty much constant every time, it did help me understand basic principles with utmost clarity. I didn't always spam the opening moves without reacting to my opponent ideas and counter attack. For instance, If my opponent is about develop a solid position, I would try to ensure that I develop my own minor pieces in such a way that the e5 square (the most important square in the London) is dominated by me. Sure I may not be able to find tactics all the time but I did grow my positional skills. Have a nice day.

Avatar of swarminglocusts

The London requires mating expertise to be fully functional. I stopped playing it because it is very drawish because the Bd6 line. It is hard to beat as well.

Avatar of pleewo

London is fine if you want to keep it, but branching out and learning other openings doesn’t hurt. Do what you want. The London is fine at all levels. I would recommend venturing into 1.e4 but meh that’s just me

Avatar of ThrillerFan

The thing about the London is beginners play it because they are naive enough to think they can just play it systematically against anything. GMs play it correctly, knowing when to simply hold the fort, when to storm the h-pawn, when the London doesn't really work, such as against the Modern (1...g6), Dutch (1...f5 or 1...e6 followed by 2...f5), or Polish (1...b5) defenses.

It is best used against 1...d5, but can be played against certain 1...Nf6 defenses as well.

Beginners have the same problem with other openings that they think they can play systematically and that simy does not work. The most glaring one, besides the London, is the English.

Avatar of Medusa_Stan
FrogboyWarpz wrote:

London is fine if you want to keep it, but branching out and learning other openings doesn’t hurt. Do what you want. The London is fine at all levels. I would recommend venturing into 1.e4 but meh that’s just me

Oh hello @FrogboyWarpz. I just wanna thank you for your advice which you gave in my forum post regarding openings for black. Finally hit 800 ELO and learned a few lines of the Caro-Kann.

Avatar of pleewo

No worries 🐸