Hey, send me some games and i'll be happy to analyze them, provided you are invested in learning
London opening
Sort:
Introduction To The London System & Jobava London System...
https://www.chess.com/blog/RussBell/the-london-system
It’s so bizarre to me that anyone at beginner or intermediate level would learn an opening like that is known for being incredibly boring, requiring a lot of practice and study to learn all the necessary variations, and that does not give you opportunities to get better at tactics. Why spend the hours for something like that, rather than getting better at chess, when even at best it won’t be fun?
It’s so annoying to play against, because I know it means my opponent knows way more than me and probably everything I can do, and I’ll be worrying that they’re still in theory the entire game and knowing if I make any little error, they will always immediately know how to punish it. I hate it so much. People should only take the time and intense work to learn something ultra boring like that after they’ve gotten good enough to take chess seriously.
It’s so annoying to play against, because I know it means my opponent knows way more than me and probably everything I can do, and I’ll be worrying that they’re still in theory the entire game and knowing if I make any little error, they will always immediately know how to punish it. I hate it so much. People should only take the time and intense work to learn something ultra boring like that after they’ve gotten good enough to take chess seriously.
I don't play the London System, but I play against it as Black. And I don't find it boring at all.
Once you get out of the opening, the game can develop in very different ways, at least at my level. I find it very instructive to play against LS, because I don't do well in closed positions and being forced to play against it is an opportunity to learn something about this style of play. And consequentely, I also have fun when I play against LS.
As I have known it, the LS seems very effective to me ( as Black, I have lost countless times ).
In general, I don't see boring openings and exciting ones. It's what comes after that counts. The way I see it, the more openings that are played, the more different playing styles you face, the less boring chess is.
Any time I encounter a London system, I immediately offer a draw. It honestly is the most dry and boring opening in chess. Of course, every game can become interesting once the middle and end game develop, but the London doesn't promote it.
The typical piece placement in the London System (Bf4, Nf3, e3, c3, Bd3, O-O) is harmonious and leads to well-coordinated pieces. The dark-squared bishop on f4 is particularly active and the setup allows for flexible pawn breaks later on.
To lift my game, I need to get through the opening on roughly equal terms. When I've done that, I've been holding my own (and improving) when it comes to tactics and patterns. Doing LOTS of puzzles and lessons has been helpful. I've also been playing around with the London system for the opening and it appears to be a useful method to get me safely into the middle game. I'd be interested in feedback from more experienced players regarding this.