London system scrubs

And that's why I play the French against 1.e4: to kill the fun of people like you with an opening I more likely know better (and enjoy) since I play it all time.

Does it make a good person? I hope not.

Is it a decent opening "tactic"? It is. :D

So, if a "good" player (as opposed to a weakling that don't know much about his system) make you uncomfortable in barely 10 moves, and that he gets a position he likes (close center, wing attack, easy mistakes for his opponent...), then he already have somehow the upper hand.

As I see it (this principle dictates my repertoire choice) your job as his opponent, is to make sure you make him unhappy by refusing him what he wants and get a position you like. So, work on it and London players will be a trifle in your world. :)

The best way to annoy a Londoner is to not play their opening. KID is a decent choice, although I’ve also considered playing a double Fianchetto setup to put those London players out of their book (always fun to see a booked up idiot confused).

However, even this sequence is enough to make a local Londoner wish he played c4 on move 2 or 3 because its hard to prove any advantage

Bottomline, I'd rather quit chess than play this opening with White pieces.

Be careful with your last example Oraoradeki. Most London players do not fear Qxb2 and are taught to play it that way (queen trapped):

So you would fall in a position they know and atrocious for Black.

(Once again, I'm not a London player but I had to go through that while looking for my variation as Black. Trickier than most people think as you see in #87.)

After 1. d4 you could play 1...g6 if you are a KID player. In return of sometimes getting a Modern after 2. e4 you get the following

Avoid: Trompowsky, Torre Attack, Veresov Attack and minor variations
Reduces in strength: The Colle and London systems

The Colle doesn't work as well against g6 as it does against e6 and without a knight on f6 you can quickly prepare e5 against the London (g6-Bg7-d6-Nd7-e5) 

 The london is best when black have comitted himself to e6, and no one seems to mention it

2... f5 is totally unsound and gives white a very good position if he knows what he's doing (which he should)

As a KID player, I'm happy to deal with the Tromp (I blow up the center with moves such as ...g5 and I put pressure on dark squares with ...Bg7 ...c5 ...Qb6-a5), the Colle (reversed KIA style, attack with pieces instead than pawns), and the London (see #82).

Plus there is no Veresov (it requires ...d5) nor Torre (requires ...e6) against the KID.

So, no offense, but basically you give 2 bad arguments out of three in favour of taking the risk to play the modern (with 1...g6) when you wanted a KID (with 1...Nf6).

There is also a Torre Attack with g6. After d4 Nf6 Nc3 I'm curious to know what do you play exactly? If you don't play d5 you get a Pirc, unless you prefer 2...c5 which is rare, and not everybody is happy to play that as Black.

I assume you mean g6? Anyways, you'll have to deal with 3. Bxf6 and a different structure arises.

@Spectator94 Please, give me a short variation of the Torre attack after 1.d4 Nf6.

PS: Against 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 I play the utmost vicious 2...g6 3.e4 d5!? Rapport's style. But it does not suit everyone and there are plenty of other decent 2th moves.

That Wikipedia link you posted even has a diagram with g6 on it, as well with a Van Wely example game. Go nuts.

Calm down, Spectator94. We are grown ups (at least I am). :)

After 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.Bg5 Bg7 4.Nd2 0-0 5.e4 scores awfully after 5...d5 (6.e5 Ne4 28% & 6.exd5 barely 10% more).

After 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.Bg5 Bg7 4.Nd2 00 5.c3 first, 5...h6 and the main line 6.Bh4 d6 7.e4 c5 8.dxc5 dxc5 leads quickly to an endgame.

Natural moves, not a lot of memorization.

'Go nuts' in this context means ''go ahead and do whatever you want with it'' lol, I find it weird you seem to take offence to that. But it does look like you now realize that there indeed is a g6-Torre Attack, so I guess I now only gave 1 bad argument huh (:

First, I wanted to say that I'm not a London Player. 

The advantages of the London System are very clear. Maybe it's not a way to fight for an advntage, but you get a very solid position with attacking chances on the kingside, with all of your pieces functioning. You have good central control, you have good development, you have a solid position, you have an attack, it seems like a very good position to me. 

Carlsen and Kamsky have heavily popularized the London System in the past few years. Take a look at this nice Carlsen game, and then think twice about condemning this opening:

Carlsen played some very simple moves, yet Tomashevsky, a very strong Grandmaster, was crushed in just 30 moves. The goal of the opening is to get a playable middlegame, and white certainly got that in this game. He then simply pushed his opponent off the board. 

Now, I'm sure that London System haters will all start screaming and bashing my head, so I'm going to go take some popcorn right now. Will the world's largest Popcorn Ball be enough?