The problems with the london system and caro kann + why they are so hated.

There's room for a variety of approaches in chess, and the best opening is the one that suits your taste and helps you enjoy the game.

Imo

a :

1 : There are refuted openings like Marshall Defense (with the confusion of two gambit variations which would not be refuted) or Latvian Gambit and there are trash openings like Damiano Defence.

These are really bad openings for players who actually want to improve their chess.

2 : London system and Caro Kann are openings that are played by GMs.

So these can't really be bad openings and it doesn't make much sense to think one dude who want to improve his chess can't do it with these openings.

b : If we are newbie (not in the meaning I am not gosu so I am a noob and a noob is a newbie so I am newbie because I am not gosu) Caro Kann, French, Pirc, Alekhine, Scandinavian even Sicilian in theory are not recommended because they don't sufficiently respect the basic principles of openings but normally we are not forever newbies so the idea that an opening is bad because of its low level only makes sense when we are newbies after that it becomes more subjective to say that an opening is bad and the opening doesn't matter as much (tactics, endgames, strategies can be much more important)

c : Opening can have a great psychological impact therefore it's up to us to choose an opening (among the valid ones) that we believe to be enough good (because when we win it's ok but when we lose if immediately afterwards we accuse the opening it's not ok).

d : Generally when we find our opening is ultimately not good we end up changing it and our old opening will have taught us.

c : The London system and the French Exchange variation there will be hatred, rage or annoyance (I mean to me it's not a rumor) but "Caro Kann is so hated", I have to have faith in dude trust me.

let people play what they want to play.

if u don't like these openings, fine, but you don't have to make a whole forum criticizing them. There will always be a person who will like the London or Caro.

BS. As long as you prepare the openings well, it's a great choice, especially at the club level.

We all know that you have been against these openings since a long time. You want agressive and fun lines but that's not the taste of all. I have seen people improve very fast playing london and caro kann. At the end of the day, let's just let people play what they want.

I don't know what you are talking about with the Caro. The Caro Kann is only boring if white makes it boring. White has many options to make it an interesting game, the Tal variation and Fantasy variations come to mind. Recently a lot of people have also been playing the Alien Gambit, and those games are plenty exciting. Maybe you aren't as proactive as you like to think you are lol. Also Black realistically should strive to play in a defensive and solid manner since White empirically has the advantage in the opening. Shuffling your pieces is better than over committing and permanently weakening your position. It is up to White to prove their advantage.

3.Nc3- Black plays 4.Nf6 and the games here arent of any intrest

3.e5 Black plays Bf5-e6-Nd7-Ne7-h6 etc.. (the tal/Nc3/g4 variation does exist, its just much more riskier for white)

3.exd5 4.c4 - blacks literal goal here is to trade everything

3.f3- black often plays e6 and trys to keep everything closed

Its blacks choice if he wants to play it more sharp or more slow.

i would recommend people to read this

https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/wx8ye2/the_london_system_is_a_perfectly_good_opening/

I wasn't a Caro or London player until I read this post, now I'll be playing both of them.

I'm sorry but where is the problem?

YES!!! That is how chess is played. White has the advantage in the opening, if white wants something to happen in the game they have to make it happen. It is really that simple.
Also what does that png you posted have to do with 3.Nc3- Black plays 4.Nf6? The Panov is not different from the exchange, the move 3.exd5 is known as the exchange caro because you are literally exchanging the pawns instead of advancing the pawn 3.e5. The panov is a line which white initiates that can occur after you enter the exchange Caro:

1. e4c62. d4d53. exd5cxd54. c4

A lot of excitement... The original idea in the Panov was c4-c5, QS Pawn Majority, sometimes met by timely e6-e5 and systematic unpicking. An early ...Nc6 is tactical, Botvinnik demolished Spielmann in, I believe, 11 moves. The exchange Caro, c2-c3 allows Black a minority attack and was (re)introduced by Fischer (who is said to have problems with the CK and played the Nc3/Nf3 line to avoid the (then) critical ...Bf5 line. There is also ...g6 vs the Panov when c4*d5 can result in minor piece "dances" to recapture the d5P. Then there's d5*c4 met by d5 vs a c6N. Now that's a rich complex, even ignoring IQPs! And that's only one set of CK possibilities...

I'm sure the London HAS sophistication. It's just that it commits white to a particular structure WITHOUT seeing what black does "wrong". Every commitment takes away alternative possibilities. 1 f4 is fine BUT white has already SAID what he proposes to DO. 1 d4, 2c4 reserves options UNTIL you see what Blacks going to play - dark squares eg KID, centre play, pressure aginst e4...

Once you know what blacks up yo THEN you pin/defend/fianchetto/unpin - a Bishop's life is a busy one!

True, but 1.d4 and 2.c4 are both committal moves, as well - White has committed both his d and c pawns early on in the game ... And as we know, pawns can't move backward.

Sometimes the d-pawn is better placed on d3 to support a fight for the light squares.

Sometimes the c4 square is better off left empty, so that a knight or bishop can utilize that square ... or so that a pawn can arrive on that square at a later, more impactful moment.

Every move can be questioned in favor of another possible move ... such is the fascinating nature of chess.

Get a free ebook on the King's Gambit, full of tactics, over 300 characteristic opening puzzles:

https://www.amazon.com/Kings-Gambit-Tactics-Lyudmil-Tsvetkov-ebook/dp/B0BQYJ57Z6/ref=rvi_d_sccl_3/136-1707135-6820206?pd_rd_w=CpVPe&content-id=amzn1.sym.f5690a4d-f2bb-45d9-9d1b-736fee412437&pf_rd_p=f5690a4d-f2bb-45d9-9d1b-736fee412437&pf_rd_r=WW9ZZ21XJ5H03Q93GXWC&pd_rd_wg=0AEz0&pd_rd_r=8631705e-e8fe-4584-ad6c-443287aa74ee&pd_rd_i=B0BQYJ57Z6&psc=1

If you don't want to play the Tartakower play the alien gambit, I said this in my original post. In order to play the panov per your move order you have to play 3. exd5, which is an exchange of center pawns, so I don't know why you are mentioning other Panov lines. The exchange of the center pawns is more passive then advancing which is the more confrontational line. That is what I am trying to say, I don't know what else to tell you. If you don't want to play passive don't exchange the center pawns.