Hello, can anyone help me understand if I have made any flaws in my attempt at the London System? I have recently learnt it.
<Comment deleted by user>
Thanks for the useful info! I really appreciate it!
Don't play london
London is a good opening no matter your rating.
There is a grat@TheKingClash said in #3:
> Ideally when you have a pawn triangle formation like in the London you want a bishop on the opposite colour of your pawn chain. 5.Bd3 is a mistake because if your opponent exchanges, you are left with a weak colour complex on the light squares. 10.e4 looks a little premature to me - before opening up the centre, you should castle first, otherwise your newly exposed King may be in danger. Probably 10.0-0 followed by Nbd2 and Re1, and then you can push e4 with much more active pieces and central control.
That totally overlaps with what I thought, when I saw your game:
a) 5. Bd3
I call this behavior "stereotyped thinking". Yes, in most variations of the London System your Bishop belongs on d3 and this move almost comes naturally to a London Player, but one thing I by myself had to learn the hard way was, that chess is a concrete game, meaning that (as long as you dont know the exact theory blindly) you have to check every position for differences/tactics/... on it's own. You should not put a piece on a square where it "typically" belongs to and hope that your move may be good - you have to be as sure as possible. So just because something works in 9 out of 10 situations, you will definitely face this one "diefferent" situation from time to time and don't want to miss it, because it may cost you the game.
In this concrete case btw. the move was not so horrible, because in potentially exchangig the light-squared bishops, black has not that much possibilities to exploit those weaknesses - i personally think what counts more in that situation is, that your (potentially exchanged) bishop couldn't help in your attack on the kingside anymore.
If you have thought maybe a little longer than only 1 second, you may could have taken advantage of the one disadvantage of black's move 4. ...Bf5 -> it's the weakened square b7 - so a move like 5. Qb3 would have been showing your opponent, that you know what you are talking about...
b) 7. Nh3
That shook me. A better opponent would have just taken your knight on the next move, doubling your pawns, weakening your potential castling-position and leaving the doubled-pawns as an permanent weakness in your camp. Without safe castling, your typical break of e4 at some point will not be very attractive anymore.
c) 10. e4
Again a case of "stereotyped thinking". Yes, e4 is the correct break at some point, but you don't want to break open the centre, while your king is still there/not safe. This is just kamikaze. Also in this concrete case (there it is again), you just blunder a pawn.
My first and foremost advice yould be to take more time in thinking on your moves.
Also there is a pretty cool book on the London, it's called: "The London System in 12 practical lessons", by Oscar de Prado.
At least I would advice you to train EASY puzzles under time pressure, so you learn to see simple tactics faster. Lichess has a great feature for that, it's called Puzzle Storm. I do this on my own, calling it "my daily pushups". Your Puzzle Storm high score is a good reference point in tracking your improvement on that area of your game.
Have fun!
> Ideally when you have a pawn triangle formation like in the London you want a bishop on the opposite colour of your pawn chain. 5.Bd3 is a mistake because if your opponent exchanges, you are left with a weak colour complex on the light squares. 10.e4 looks a little premature to me - before opening up the centre, you should castle first, otherwise your newly exposed King may be in danger. Probably 10.0-0 followed by Nbd2 and Re1, and then you can push e4 with much more active pieces and central control.
That totally overlaps with what I thought, when I saw your game:
a) 5. Bd3
I call this behavior "stereotyped thinking". Yes, in most variations of the London System your Bishop belongs on d3 and this move almost comes naturally to a London Player, but one thing I by myself had to learn the hard way was, that chess is a concrete game, meaning that (as long as you dont know the exact theory blindly) you have to check every position for differences/tactics/... on it's own. You should not put a piece on a square where it "typically" belongs to and hope that your move may be good - you have to be as sure as possible. So just because something works in 9 out of 10 situations, you will definitely face this one "diefferent" situation from time to time and don't want to miss it, because it may cost you the game.
In this concrete case btw. the move was not so horrible, because in potentially exchangig the light-squared bishops, black has not that much possibilities to exploit those weaknesses - i personally think what counts more in that situation is, that your (potentially exchanged) bishop couldn't help in your attack on the kingside anymore.
If you have thought maybe a little longer than only 1 second, you may could have taken advantage of the one disadvantage of black's move 4. ...Bf5 -> it's the weakened square b7 - so a move like 5. Qb3 would have been showing your opponent, that you know what you are talking about...
b) 7. Nh3
That shook me. A better opponent would have just taken your knight on the next move, doubling your pawns, weakening your potential castling-position and leaving the doubled-pawns as an permanent weakness in your camp. Without safe castling, your typical break of e4 at some point will not be very attractive anymore.
c) 10. e4
Again a case of "stereotyped thinking". Yes, e4 is the correct break at some point, but you don't want to break open the centre, while your king is still there/not safe. This is just kamikaze. Also in this concrete case (there it is again), you just blunder a pawn.
My first and foremost advice yould be to take more time in thinking on your moves.
Also there is a pretty cool book on the London, it's called: "The London System in 12 practical lessons", by Oscar de Prado.
At least I would advice you to train EASY puzzles under time pressure, so you learn to see simple tactics faster. Lichess has a great feature for that, it's called Puzzle Storm. I do this on my own, calling it "my daily pushups". Your Puzzle Storm high score is a good reference point in tracking your improvement on that area of your game.
Have fun!
<Comment deleted by user>
@TheDudeAbides said in #6:
> London is a good opening no matter your rating.
Seriously?! I think your students will NEVER become CM, because there is NO clear plan for amateurs. They will always get the same type of positions and because of dogmatic thinking they will never understand small positional advantages. It is much better to play a "normall" opening with clear plan strategical and positional ideas and tactical patters which are typical to a certain opening
> London is a good opening no matter your rating.
Seriously?! I think your students will NEVER become CM, because there is NO clear plan for amateurs. They will always get the same type of positions and because of dogmatic thinking they will never understand small positional advantages. It is much better to play a "normall" opening with clear plan strategical and positional ideas and tactical patters which are typical to a certain opening
Stereotyped thinking alert, again ;)
Of course playing different openings has it's benefits (btw. nobody was talking about playing hte London exclusively), but there for example actually is IM Nikolas Lubbe (also having GM norms), that played the London (he calls it Bertramisch) almost exclusively in his youth and now as adult also came back to it very succesfull...
He argues, that you get into the game and can "learn to play chess".
10 people but 12 different opinions on 1 topic...
Of course playing different openings has it's benefits (btw. nobody was talking about playing hte London exclusively), but there for example actually is IM Nikolas Lubbe (also having GM norms), that played the London (he calls it Bertramisch) almost exclusively in his youth and now as adult also came back to it very succesfull...
He argues, that you get into the game and can "learn to play chess".
10 people but 12 different opinions on 1 topic...
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.