Queen Pawn Game: Mason Attack

That's completely understandable. And I didn't mean it as a personal attack against you, so I very much apologize if it seemed that way. And it's not to say that titled players are infallible, but indeed I've seen a lot of people on these threads often argue with titled players in ways that seem disrespectful - not to say that you were being disrespectful at all, but many people are, and I guess it's caused me to be a little too sensitive to that.

As for my name, unfortunately, it is not so easy. Learning from losses takes quite a bit of determination and a stiff upper lip. It's only natural to want to get as far away as possible from one's loss; any time spent analyzing is so much more easily spent on games that are won, with it being extremely hard to spend time with one's losses. But this is really the key to improving as a player, and I've learned that it is so much easier said than done. If you ever hire a chess coach, you will find that they aren't the least bit interested in your wins - and no matter how much you will desire to show them your wins - they will demand to only see your losses, and all they will ever want to talk about are the games that you lose. It can be very frustrating!

LosingAndLearning81, indeed, I did not intend to be disrespectful, so I certainly hope the IM did not take it that way. And I've not been formally coached in a long, long time. I'd love to do so, when that's financially possible. In the meantime, I take near-constant drubbings from my expert-level brother in law, and he likes to engage in post-mortems with me. I take what lessons I can in the meantime. It's great that you're taking such a beautiful game as this so seriously, I wish you much success with your determination and stiff upper lip!

You too, man. Good luck in the future and keep improving. Beat that brother-in-law.

I think the London System is more complex and interesting than most people make it out to be. I play it exclusively with white and I have found many very interesting variations with white, and lots of them have great plans and attacking chances.

As black I would recommend you play this idea (I have labeled comments with the ideas behind the moves)

PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU LOOK AT ALL THE SIDELINES TOO!!!

I hope this helps!

I see so many people disparage the London system. Some say it's boring. Do they realize how stupid that sounds to non chess players? As a chess player. I find winning to be exciting, which begs a question, doesn't it?

Some say it's gimmicky. I suppose if the internet was around when hypermodern play came about, people would say that was gimmicky too.

The London System appears to be one of the most dynamic openings in chess, in the sense that new lines are just now being discovered. The most popular lines now are different from the lines of two years ago by the third or fourth move. many of the variations have no formal names. 

I'm sticking with it, it wins often for me and when it loses, there's usually a nugget of new chess knowledge to be gleaned. I'm very happy that it ticks people off, that's an extra.

Oh, and my soon-to-be outdated rule of thumb for black -- don't castle kingside.

I think what most players fail to realize is the Modern way of white playing the London is 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 c5 4.c3(!) Nc6 

Its a big point for London devotees that they not commit Knights to f3 or d2 until Black shows his hand. 

Oh, btw. The London is not boring. As soon as black commits his pawn to d5 he has an almost irrevocable hole at e5 that black must contend with. I have ground out many simple and hard-nosed wins against superior players by using the London as white. And I DO agree that it’s  “campy” and quiet but also underrated and completely sound. Just what we want against stronger players. 

You speak as if trying to find something wrong with a very generalized comment. You post what black is supposed to do to crush the London and I’ll pick it apart. Sounds fair.

I'm started to use London system because I had enough from Sicilian defence! If black want blood, he can get it!

Nobody plays 3.dxc5, you'll see 3.e3 most of the time and 3.c3 is a rarer alternative, and then there's the gambit 3.e4

On what basis is it best? It just seems to give up the centre.

I knew you would say that. The engine is wrong

In which database? In 365Chess it's one of the lowest scoring moves

No, the score is calculated by adding the winning percentage to half of the drawing percentage. If it was just the winning percentage you might be correct (EDIT actually you'd still be wrong in that case), but in 365chess it scores 41.7% while 3.e3 scores 52.8% and 3.e4 scores 42.1%.

I see, a misunderstanding.

Be careful with this:

Queen's Pawn Opening: Mason Attack 
1.f4
d5
2.d4
Nc6
3.e3
Nf6
4.Bb5
a6
5.Bxc6+
bxc6
6.b4
Bg4
7.Nf3
Rb8
8.Nc3
Rxb4