You saw Bronstein, Octo ?
Wow!
My sister saw Tal, Botvinnik, Smyslov, Petrosian and Spassky all at once. She was a receptionist at the hotel where they stayed for a tournament. Apparently they were lovely, especially Tal.
(European Team Championship 1973. A fearsomely strong Soviet team where all the top six boards were future or ex World Champions (Karpov in addition to the above) and Efim Geller unable to claim a place higher than board seven.
Nice one Gil! ty :)
I wasn't saying that the Qc1 idea was good, I wanted to see some refutals of the idea. Furthermore, let's take it one step further then. What is your take on Qxb6? I agree that we are discussing subpar lines, but I think that is important as well, in case you are ever defending against the London and your opponent plays these ideas.
I believe some people on this forum are wrong. However, I do not feel like being in an agruement today. So I will not mention any names.
I will just say the London System is nice 
I wasn't saying that the Qc1 idea was good, I wanted to see some refutals of the idea. Furthermore, let's take it one step further then. What is your take on Qxb6? I agree that we are discussing subpar lines, but I think that is important as well, in case you are ever defending against the London and your opponent plays these ideas.
Are you talking to me Bird?
If you are than I will say. It usually opens the Rook file giving the side that takes an active rook.
Not ideal, but isn't White temporarily solid?
I was trying to answer your post like 11 hours ago lol but my pc totally went down. However, I am back now HA HA.
In the London System white usually develops their bishop outside of the pawn chain.>>>>>
No, always, since that is what the London system consists of. c-bishop inside the pawn chain would be a Colle. Pawn c2-c4 is a queen's gambit.
My statement about the London System was correct.
The London System always has the bishop outside of the pawn chain on f4.
The Colle is a different line. That has the bishop inside the pawn chain.
I wasn't saying that the Qc1 idea was good, I wanted to see some refutals of the idea. Furthermore, let's take it one step further then. What is your take on Qxb6? I agree that we are discussing subpar lines, but I think that is important as well, in case you are ever defending against the London and your opponent plays these ideas.
I play the Kings Indian Defense against the London. Which I think does OK.
However, I have had to learn some of these Qb6 lines becuase I play the London System with the white pieces from time to time. Use to play it alot more when I was a beginner.
Black usually gets queen side play in this line. The reason black plays c5 is to help him get more influence with an Open C file or for expansion on the queen side.
So any Qxb6 moves will only open up more files for the Black rooks which already want to get active on the queen side.
A couple of points here. I should have thought that the way to stop black's queenside ideas is for white to play dc, obviously preventing ...c4. Then, black can no longer oppose queens if the white one goes to b3, since white swaps and black gets doubled, isolated pawns. This is a thematic idea here.
It's interesting that Xplayer plays the KID against the London system. The London system was originally developed as an antidote to fianchetto systems so xplayer may be implying the the London system is no good in this respect. I have no idea whether this is correct or not.
It seems counter productive to have a fianchetteo when their is a pawn on d4, c3, b2,e3
which is all dark squares. However, with that comes a cost. The cost is they can be probed.
BORING!!!!
Nice one Gil! ty :)
She got me Spassky's autograph since I'd been quietly rooting for him in 1972 (mostly because I though Fischer had behaved like an asshole) but if I'd been as keen on chess then as I was a year or two later I'd have tried to wangle an introduction. 
Well, the idea of the London is very much to create a bulwark against the fianchettoed bishop. So you're implying that it isn't an effective bulwark?
Well generally white has a triangle formation and black has in recent years began to make a KID Triangle formation back lol which is pretty funny but it has happened.
The London System is solid. I don't think there will ever be a refutation to it. Its super solid. People say its boring but that is because they don't understand solid lines have more flexibility than other lines.
I'm somewhat uncomfortable with fianchetto formations. I like playing against them. Against the KID I use the Classical System with 9 Ne1.
Yeah I love the fianchetteo lines maybe even to much HA HA.
It always makes me feel more safe with my king for some reason.
Ah it's very disappointing to find out that Optimissy can say stupid things :(
I guess the downside of an immediate Qc1 is that you haven't forced the concession ...c4 and so after moves like ...Bf5 leading to about the same position Black has the extra option of opening the c-file at some point which could be a little dangerous with that bishop pointing at c2.
The London System is solid. I don't think there will ever be a refutation to it. Its super solid. People say its boring but that is because they don't understand solid lines have more flexibility than other lines.
I agree that it is solid. I used to play that system because I knew I'd always reach the middle game with more or less equal chances as my opponent, whomever it be.
I mean we looked at the Qb6 lines for black.
That was the only line that is considered some what critical. Yet even with those Qb6 lines black still couldn't punish white right off the bat.
In that 1 example I showed black got 3 tempos. Yet lol white wasn't in checkmate. How many openings can you play where you lose 3 tempos and are not checkmated already.
An if that line can't checkmate white. Than what line can lol?
Furthermore, It is easy to avoid those Qb6 lines. I mean people on this forum already showed how. You don't even need an in depth examination or anything lol. Half the forum posters already commented with examples.
Lastly, The London System is used against everything. Which shows after 1.d4 it doesn't matter what black plays you will end up in a London System Setup regardless of what they do.
They really can't stop you.
Which is why I have played it. I liked it and I figured even if one day I stop playing it and play other more aggressive openings at least I will have it in my back pocket so to speak. It isn't a line that will go to waste.
@xplayer. I do not really understand why you give Nd2 an exclamation as I already showed black is equal in the position after Nd2.
It is very nice that some posters show the diagrams of potential lines in this opening [or any other opening]
You saw Bronstein, Octo ?
Wow!