Black playing ...h5 in the London System

Anyone who has studied my games or has played against me knows that one of my favorite openings as white is the London System. However, the idea of abstaining from castling and instead going for a very early h5 pawn push, seems to give me difficulty. Take this game, which I just played today- (I was so tired and unfocused during this game that I withdrew from the tournament afterwards to stop further damage)- in which my opponent emplyed this idea to destroy my kingside.

Like I said, I was not entirely awake during this game, and my opponent was simply a stronger player. But I have struggled with this against a lower rated player. Into the archives I go.............

Okay, so this game was much uglier. But I think that Jane's subpar play was because she was not very high rated and struggled with such a complicated position. It certainly wasn't because of the ...h5 idea. Keep in mind, she's the daughter of Alexander Stripunsky, who is a very strong GM. But has Mr. Stripunsky employed the same idea, and thus taught it to his daughter? 

Well, in both games, the databases say that no player has ever played ...h5 in those positions. However, those positions occured in less than 10 games. There obviously must be games where black played this. 

I found this one game:https://www.365chess.com/view_game.php?g=3173411&m=19 in which black managed to win at the end. But I cannot find any more games, no matter how hard I look. So what's my conclusion? I believe that this aggressive idea is a biproduct of the imaginations of young children who are taught to play aggressively and actively in openings. There are no grandmasters that have ever played this, after all. 

Yes, dxe6 was not a good move. But if black gets to play hxg3 and white responds with fxg3, the h2 pawn will likely become very weak. And black doesn't have to play hxg3 if the pawn makes it to h4. Black can make a pawn wedge by playing pushing the pawn to h3. I remember I played a candidate master a while ago and he did that, and he ended up mating me on the back rank at the end. 

No one else has anything to say?

8. O-O is inaccuracy, better is  8.h3 instead to save best bishop. It is worth using one tempo to improve bishop cos in this stable position with closed centre, the value of one tempo is relatively low. 

 14. dxe6 is another inaccurcy that you lose your centre unnecessarily. Black cant capture that pawn by risking open "e" file. So your pawn is auto protected.

Even after move 14, white is slightly worse but you can still play well by exchanging his best black bishop by 15. Ba6! 

Yes, in OTB, such slight inaccuracy like 8. O-O  is critical against strong players. You may argue, O-O is present in opening variation/explorer but it is your job to analyse and research on your own to know  which variation is better . 

Yes, h3 would have been better than castling. I don't deny that. But I am discussing how black playing h5 exploits white's premature castling and loss of his dark squared bishop. 

But Black could have played any half-decent move there and been better. Surely if he/she gets Nh5xg3 in such a fashion the whole thing is just a non-starter for white. 

But h5 is an idea that apparently GM's don't try, and engines don't recommend, even though it is an excellent move.

I just ran my Stockfish on it for a few mins - ...h5 was its top choice, and its second choice was ...g5 with ...h5 to follow, but yeah, I think whatever Black goes for there, he is more than fine and probably even a bit better with the bishiop pair.

You will be amazed top GM analysing  day and night with engines for home preparations. They even hired seconds to for those jobs. 

Computers are assistant tools.  Do you need computers? Well , you can neglect calculators and use abacus.

Here is Carlsen interview 

How important are computer programs for your preparation?

Computers are very important for sure. All the analysis I've done has been with the help of the computers. You constantly need them.

Well, what Grischuk said, you dont need a coach, you just need computers. Many coaches wont tell you frankly because they will lose their job.

"

Top young chess players are appearing thanks to computers. Twenty years ago in order to grow as a chess player it was essential to have a good coach. Now you don’t really need a coach as there are special programs – just work and don’t be lazy."