London system scrubs

Lower rated players who play the London have a way better shot of getting good at chess than the idiots that memorize 20 moves of najdorf or Spanish theory only to still consistently blunder a piece 10 moves into the game because their opponent went out of book early and forced the guy that just memorized lines to actually play chess. The London is simple, solid, and gives you a playable position everytime which allows you to spend your study time on the parts of chess that are actually important. I would never bash on anyone for taking such a simple (and smart IMO) approach to learning such a complicated game, only a fool would.

that was sarcasm oc.  I did say you comments well written.  actually  I rather appreciate them.

 

the thread is SO ridiculous, and they is so much BS happening that it is no longer clear what people are believing.

 

this is just a bad rant PRETENDING it was a proper chess thread.   I know, no body made me read it or respond to it.  but still,.....

 

People who play the London system are the reason for chess being mistaken as a long boring drawn out game. When there are no strategical ideas behind their robotic moves, no tactics present themselves which creates a long dry-ish, boring King pawn ending. No fireworks. Just sissy play. It's like camping in a video game. I played the London like twice when I was learning the basics and it was painful how boring it was I was ready to say forget it.

magnus carsen has used the london so has  boris spassky 

This is nothing more than an opinion masquerading as fact.  

You do realise that other people are different from you and have a different frame of reference to you and what you find dull they may relish? Its what makes life so wonderful, the variety.  You played the London system twice and you deem yourself an expert or at very least enough of one to denounce it.  What if the strategic and tactical ideas were beyond you at the time so that you were then and now unable to grasp them.

I have seen enough London games to know that there are plenty of fireworks and seen some amateur players beat up Grandmasters with it. One wonders why your experience is so different for either I was dreaming or you are talking pants and not just any old pants, but extra frilly hyper concentrated pantaloons!

Yes, they "used" it, they didn't "play" it. Exactly.

I just crushed some London System Patzer on my ICC smurf account in 18 moves lmao. I am sure after that game he immediately went to chessbase and bought the new Colle System DVD. I'm going to crush this system tomorrow, lets see what he is going to buy after that.

 

Wow, talk about extremist!

 

Uhm, I never said you should memorize 30 moves of Najdorf theory.  You can learn a lot in chess by not memorizing any moves at all, and just playing natural moves after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 or 1.d4 d5 2.c4.

There is no real logic, rhyme, or reason behind the London System.  You are basically trying to control 1 square on the board, e5, and say to hell with it for the other 63 squares.

 

Take the QGD.  1.d4 d5 2.c4.  What does c4 do?  It threatens to remove the central pawn, force a piece to go to d5 (at the moment the Queen) and then build up the big center.  So Black plays 2...e6 so that if White ever does take, Black can take back with the pawn and continue to control e4, the other central square that White did not occupy on move 1, and actually weakened by playing 1.d4.

 

So now, what should White do after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6?  Well, our plan is to attack the d-pawn.  So 3.Nc3 puts more pressure on the d5 pawn.  Black responds 3...Nf6, trying to defend his strong point on d5.

 

Now what?  Well, I can't really put any more pressure on d5 directly without moving my Queen out early.  So how about instead of directly attacking d5, let's pin one of its defenders with 4.Bg5.  After 4...Be7, unpinning, White needs to get his Kingside pieces out so he can castle.  He can't move e4 because the pawn would hang, so he goes 5.e3 to get the Bishop out.  Black castles, and now Knights before Bishops, so 6.Nf3.  After 6...Nbd7, Black has committed his Knight, and can't go to c6 now, so White can try to grab the c-file since it can't be blocked very well with 7.Rc1.  After 7...c6, solidifying d5 and creating somewhat of a block on the c-file, White won't be able to easily roll into Black's territory on the Queenside.

 

So now you've seen 7 moves of Queen's Gambit theory, but not via memorization, via explanation and understanding.  If you actually understand this, you would have some idea what to do against a weird move, like 6...Na6 instead of 6...Nbd7.

 

If all you are doing is memorizing moves and not actually going out of the way to understand why each move is made, then you are just as dumb as those that think taking the lazy route through the use of the London System will get them success are!

Uhm, I never said that you said anything Thrillerfan. Mainly because I wasn't even speaking to you.....

Of course Magnus played the London Against Giri because he's a quite timid player trying to hold on to his status in a way that shows no class. No respect for Magnus shame on him. A true champion has more ambition than that. Pathetic. This is not how a world champion should set an example. I bet the commentators were quite silent for 5 hours. "Magnus showing professional passiveness with his bishop parked on h2 threatening nothing" ??? I mean cmon what is there to say ? I just wanna puke, seriously. Now, since the world champ is playing this rubbish I get to see it a lot more against my opponents online because everybody rides the Magnus meat.

this is just more slobbery drool, i must be in some kind of zombie apocalypse man!

Lots of black opening systems can be effectively used from the white side.  Tony Kosten's book on the English, and Gata Kamsky's use of the Reversed Slav (or London System) are two good examples.

The idea that white somehow has an obligation to play super energetically (and theoretically) in order to maintain the first move advantage is a silly bias, afflicting entirely too many chess players, especially those rated under USCF 2000.

But that bias is great for the sale of opening books, CDs, and all manner of ECO-like books being hawked.  

so thriller says there is no point to the the london game and clark says its timid class-less chess.

 

Clearly you guys have a Dizzying Intellect

see now, when things get THIS ridiculous, you clearly Must post pictures because people must be using only their EQ to guide their posting. and its well known that pics appeal more to people of formidable EQ.

+1

The idiots who claim the London System are is a bad, boring opening are hte idiots who cannot seem to win against it. 

My best (short) tournament result was @USCF 1800 playing an (utterly boring) "Reversed Gurgenidze Modern" (essentially with both colors) in a 5 round, G/30 tourney.

Two wins and two draws against four USCF Experts, and one loss to a former State Champion and NM.

Being familiar with this "dumb, lame, opening," and not needing to spend too much time thinking (in this opening), probably had something to do with this outcome.

But perhaps I am mistaken.  Duh ??  

Seriously, we already have engines arising ruining the game giving players ideas. It's causing enough damage. We don't need these silly systems pouring salt on the wound. Bunch of knuckleheads who don't see what's going on

This site is full of players using their favorite opening book (in their lap) while playing either color.  So what ??

Opening systems, engine use, and ECO-use are all prevelant, CLEARLY.

No way to fix that by starting this utterly lame thead.  Please make a note of it.

I'm sure if Fischer were alive right now he'd be saying the same stuff I'm saying

Maybe he's come back through you.  Are you now channelling Fischer in this wonderfully exciting thread ??

Keep up the Great Work ??