My first attempt at the London System - FAIL

The opening is not the problem.  You first need to be able to find better moves from your chess understanding, your skill in calculating lines of play and your positional judgement.  

If you are weak in those areas then no amount of memorisation of opening lines will be of any use to you.

I agree. This is one reason that I have chosen to study the London system, to force myself to play better positionally instead of playing tactical lines all of the time. The point of the London system is not to have to memorize isn't it?

Because it's the best move, by far- at least when followed consistently (by an early c2-c4).

Only partly. Yes, the London system is more about achieving a sound position with prospects than going all out for an opening advantage or quick kill.  But it is getting more and more popular with top players so it is accumulating theory just like every opening that becomes popular.

It may still need less memorisation than many other openings.  It may also be true that it is easier to find your way unaided and unprepared in the London system than in many other openings (the Najdorf Sicilian, Meran and Marshall gambit come to mind as examples). But there is still a lot to know, and some lines that have to be memorised if you want to be thoroughly prepared.

Says who? In what way?  Please explain.

White has B (a good one!) and N against two N's, his doubled pawns cannot be exploited ... in fact they make his king's position harder to break down, Black has no immediate tactical threats, and White can more easily and more quickly attack Black's castled position than Black can do anything in the centre or on White's K-side.

So how is Black better?  Is it because some engine or other has mis-evaluated it, or because some opening book  or database says -/+  ?

What is more the opening isn't even a typical London system.  White often plays Bf4 and e3 before Nf3, so Black's B-g4xf3 giving White doubled pawns does not happen very often.

You should play Bf4 first and not Nf3 first. This gives you more flexibility, as you might play e3 afterwards or Nf3 or e3, Bd3 before Nf3 in some variations it is good to have options...that' s what the books say...

Replay chess games of the London System

Play e4 because it means you are an agressive attacker. and d4 means less attacking play,more on positional,while c4,The English Opening,is depending on what variation will you choose.

Doubled pawns is a crippled majority in the endgames.

The Queen's Gambit is slightly agressive,so when Fischer played the English against Spassky,it was transposed into an agressive variation of the Queen's Gambit Declined.

d4 Nf3 Bf4 e3 Be2 h3 O-O c3 Nbd2 Qc2 that's the order of it!

Please explain Chesed 1973..Who will weaken his own kingside for nothing?

25.Qxd3??

xc3

Blunder bxc3

unless.... YOU MEMORISE ALL OF THEM UNTIL THE END GAME!! Holy crap I am an actual genius haha this is a fool proof plan

I have given this thought. This is what GM Simon Williams suggests.

I am an e4 player and have an attacking style. I am trying to improve my positional play and thus, the switch to d4. I need to work more on thinking for myself instead of just playing in my comfort zone (Ruy Lopez) all the time.