I once heard the Torre Attack described as The Old Man's Bad Habit (Aagaard), and no less a tribute can be paid to the London...
"One problem is that this is actually a pretty good opening"
-- Christof Sielecki
The original idea of the London System was as an Anti-KID weapon in the tournament in our capital in 1922, fighting for the control of central dark squares.
[Event "London BCF Congress"] [Site "?"] [Date "1922.??.??"] [Round "4"] [White "Alekhine, Alexander"] [Black "Euwe, Max"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "A48"] [PlyCount "99"] [EventDate "1922.??.??"] [SourceTitle "HCL"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 g6 3. Bf4 Bg7 4. Nbd2 c5 5. e3 d6 6. c3 Nc6 7. h3 O-O 8. Bc4 Re8 9. O-O e5 10. dxe5 Nxe5 11. Bxe5 dxe5 12. Ng5 Be6 13. Bxe6 fxe6 14. Nde4 Nxe4 15. Qxd8 Rexd8 16. Nxe4 b6 17. Rfd1 Kf8 18. Kf1 Ke7 19. c4 h6 20. Ke2 Rxd1 21. Rxd1 Rb8 22. Rd3 Bh8 23. a4 Rc8 24. Rb3 Kd7 25. a5 Kc6 26. axb6 axb6 27. Ra3 Bg7 28. Ra7 Rc7 29. Ra8 Re7 30. Rc8+ Kd7 31. Rg8 Kc6 32. h4 Kc7 33. g4 Kc6 34. Kd3 Rd7+ 35. Kc3 Rf7 36. b3 Kc7 37. Kd3 Rd7+ 38. Ke2 Rf7 39. Nc3 Re7 40. g5 hxg5 41. hxg5 Kc6 42. Kd3 Rd7+ 43. Ke4 Rc7 44. Nb5 Re7 45. f3 Kd7 46. Rb8 Kc6 47. Rc8+ Kd7 48. Rc7+ Kd8 49. Rc6 Rb7 50. Rxe6 1-0Capablanca later played a game that was a good advert for it against Yates in 1924, where again dark square dominance was a theme.
[Event "New York"] [Site "?"] [Date "1924.??.??"] [Round "7"] [White "Capablanca, Jose Raul"] [Black "Yates, Frederick"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "D00"] [PlyCount "153"] [EventDate "1924.??.??"] [SourceTitle "HCL"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. Bf4 Bg7 5. e3 O-O 6. h3 c5 7. dxc5 Qa5 8. Nd2 Qxc5 9. Nb3 Qb6 10. Be5 e6 11. Nb5 Ne8 12. Bxg7 Nxg7 13. h4 a6 14. Nc3 Nc6 15. Bd3 f5 16. Qd2 Ne5 17. Be2 Nc4 18. Bxc4 dxc4 19. Qd4 Qc7 20. Qc5 Qxc5 21. Nxc5 b6 22. N5a4 Rb8 23. O-O-O b5 24. Nc5 Rb6 25. a4 Nh5 26. b3 cxb3 27. cxb3 bxa4 28. N3xa4 Rc6 29. Kb2 Nf6 30. Rd2 a5 31. Rhd1 Nd5 32. g3 Rf7 33. Nd3 Rb7 34. Ne5 Rcc7 35. Rd4 Kg7 36. e4 fxe4 37. Rxe4 Rb5 38. Rc4 Rxc4 39. Nxc4 Bd7 40. Nc3 Rc5 41. Ne4 Rb5 42. Ned6 Rc5 43. Nb7 Rc7 44. Nbxa5 Bb5 45. Nd6 Bd7 46. Nac4 Ra7 47. Ne4 h6 48. f4 Be8 49. Ne5 Ra8 50. Rc1 Bf7 51. Rc6 Bg8 52. Nc5 Re8 53. Ra6 Re7 54. Ka3 Bf7 55. b4 Nc7 56. Rc6 Nb5+ 57. Kb2 Nd4 58. Ra6 Be8 59. g4 Kf6 60. Ne4+ Kg7 61. Nd6 Bb5 62. Ra5 Bf1 63. Ra8 g5 64. fxg5 hxg5 65. hxg5 Bg2 66. Re8 Rc7 67. Rd8 Nc6 68. Ne8+ Kf8 69. Nxc7+ Nxd8 70. Kc3 Bb7 71. Kd4 Bc8 72. g6 Nb7 73. Ne8 Nd8 74. b5 Kg8 75. g5 Kf8 76. g7+ Kg8 77. g6 1-0And Frank Marshall used it in his own style, playing for mate in a way that may later have inspired Mark Hebden:
[Event "Ostend"] [Site "Ostend"] [Date "1907.??.??"] [Round "3"] [White "Marshall, Frank James"] [Black "Burn, Amos"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "A48"] [PlyCount "39"] [EventDate "1907.??.??"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 d6 3. Bf4 Nbd7 4. e3 g6 5. Bd3 Bg7 6. Nbd2 O-O 7. h4 Re8 8. h5 Nxh5 9. Rxh5 gxh5 10. Bxh7+ Kxh7 11. Ng5+ Kg6 12. Ndf3 e5 13. Nh4+ Kf6 14. Nh7+ Ke7 15. Nf5+ Ke6 16. Nxg7+ Ke7 17. Nf5+ Ke6 18. d5+ Kxf5 19. Qxh5+ Ke4 20. O-O-O 1-0After this initial enthusiasm, the trail goes cold for a while, warming up with the intervention of David Bronstein. Black can hope to make a point about the early development of the Bishop by attacking b2. Sometimes White plays it as a gambit, sometimes White defends with Qc1/Qc2, sometimes White blocks with Qb3, when the Queens are likely to be swapped. One thing that I got out of looking at London games by Bronstein and others is the paradoxical power of doubled pawns. Sometimes Qb3 Qb6 Qxb6 axb6 (or the same with a swap on b3) showed the doubled pawns as a weakness, but sometimes the open a-file and chances to break twice with the b-pawn proved stronger. The creative Bronstein can be found on both sides of the argument.
[Event "Vinkovci"] [Site "?"] [Date "1970.??.??"] [Round "11"] [White "Bronstein, David I"] [Black "Bertok, Mario"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "D02"] [PlyCount "117"] [EventDate "1970.??.??"] [SourceTitle "MCL"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 g6 3. Bf4 Bg7 4. Nbd2 d5 5. e3 c5 6. c3 Qb6 7. Qb3 O-O 8. Qxb6 axb6 9. Bc7 Nfd7 10. Bb5 Na6 11. Bg3 Nf6 12. h3 Bd7 13. Be2 Rfc8 14. O-O Nc7 15. Rfe1 Ne6 16. Be5 Bc6 17. a3 c4 18. Rac1 b5 19. Bd1 Bh6 20. Bc2 Ne4 21. Nxe4 dxe4 22. Nd2 f5 23. a4 bxa4 24. Nxc4 Ra6 25. Na3 Nc7 26. Bd1 Nd5 27. Be2 Ra5 28. c4 Nc7 29. Nb5 Ne8 30. Nc3 Bg7 31. Bxg7 Kxg7 32. Ra1 b6 33. Rab1 Nd6 34. b4 axb3 35. Rxb3 Ba8 36. Rb4 Rc7 37. Na4 b5 38. Nc5 Rca7 39. cxb5 Ra1 40. Reb1 Rxb1+ 41. Rxb1 Ra2 42. Kf1 Bd5 43. b6 g5 44. Ke1 Nb7 45. Bd1 Ra5 46. Kd2 Ra2+ 47. Bc2 h5 48. Kc3 Bc6 49. g4 fxg4 50. hxg4 h4 51. Bxe4 Nxc5 52. Bxc6 Na6 53. Rf1 Nb8 54. Bd5 Ra5 55. Be4 e6 56. b7 Nd7 57. Bc6 Nb8 58. Bh1 Kf7 59. Rc1 1-0
[Event "URS-HUN m Moscow"] [Site "?"] [Date "1971.??.??"] [Round "2"] [White "Bronstein, David I"] [Black "Farago, Ivan"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "A46"] [PlyCount "91"] [EventDate "1971.??.??"] [SourceTitle "EXT 2002"] 1. d4 e6 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Bf4 c5 4. c3 Qb6 5. Qb3 Nc6 6. e3 Qxb3 7. axb3 b6 8. h3 Be7 9. dxc5 bxc5 10. Bb5 Bb7 11. Nbd2 a6 12. Ba4 Nd5 13. Bh2 Nb6 14. Nc4 Nxc4 15. bxc4 d6 16. O-O-O O-O-O 17. Bc2 Nb8 18. e4 e5 19. b3 g6 20. Nd2 Bg5 21. Rhf1 Bf4 22. g3 Bh6 23. f4 Nc6 24. Kb2 exf4 25. gxf4 Bg7 26. e5 dxe5 27. f5 Rd7 28. Ne4 Rhd8 29. Rxd7 Rxd7 30. Nxc5 Rc7 31. Ne4 Rd7 32. Bg1 Bh6 33. c5 Bf4 34. Nd6+ Kc7 35. b4 Ne7 36. f6 Ng8 37. Nxb7 Kxb7 38. c6+ Kxc6 39. Ba4+ Kc7 40. Bxd7 Kxd7 41. Ra1 Nxf6 42. Rxa6 Nd5 43. b5 e4 44. c4 Nc7 45. Ra7 e3 46. b6 1-0The London System has a number of advantages for the club player.
- White's pieces tend to come to the same sorts of squares each game,
- it concentrates on some fairly simple aims in the opening (fast, solid development, central occupation) and
- there isn't much theory on it because there are no sharp lines.
- White's pieces tend to come to the same sorts of squares each game, so it should be easy to predict and counter.
- It concentrates on some fairly simple aims in the opening (fast, solid develoopment, central occupation) which can be met happily with the same sorts of strategy.
- There isn't much theory on it because there are no sharp lines, which means Black shouldn't struggle either to find a decent line against it nor to equalise.
So much, so general. In practice, passive or too-simple play by Black can lead to trouble, and, with a space or development advantage, White can attack happily on either side of the board. I've lost and struggled against the London throughout my chess career, and watched Peter Lane (formerly of this parish) have some real walk-throughs against strong players with this system. Repertoire books (Soltis 1988, Johanssen & Kovacevic 2009) do give unrealistic numbers of White wins (2/40 losses in Soltis) but they also give you some recipes about how to play, and a player with a plan will usually beat a player without one. It all depends on what ideas you can bring to the game. Magnus Carlsen brings more to a game than most, and he can beat top Grandmasters with the London.
John Cox had a superb introduction to 'Dealing with d4 Deviations':
I begged Everyman Chess to let me write this book. All my chess-playing life I have had a terrible record against these feeble variants, as I saw them. The final straw was being utterly slaughtered by Richard Pert in a London league match in the 4 e3 line in Chapter 9. I wanted the incentive to study them and give myself the opportunity to put this right. And for me, it's worked splendidly. I believe I have really learned something about these systems, and if I am able to pass on to the reader the confidence I have now gained myself, then the job will have been well done. ...I think it's worth examining why I used to do so badly against these systems. Dealing with these openings successfully is a matter of psychological approach among other things – it's not by chance that every work from Black's point of view called them 'annoying' or some synonym. I set out what I now feel were my main failings in this area in the hope others might recognize some of theirs and be inspired to remedy them at less cost in points than I managed.
1) The most obvious point – I didn't actually have a repertoire at all against, say, the Colle. You just play chess, right? Develop the pieces and equalize. I remember Grandmaster Vlatko Kovacevic playing the Colle against me back before databases. I had no idea this was his customary weapon of mass destruction, and I thought I must have sat down at the wrong board. A GM playing 3 e3??
With that attitude, it won't surprise you to learn I got torched on the kingside around about move 25. Only the fact that the game was played in a comparatively minor event has saved me from appearing in every Colle book since on the wrong end of a classic White crush. Time has mercifully obscured the details, but I know I went ...d5 and ...c5. Pretty soon a knight appeared on e5 and I didn't seem to be able to shift it. Shortly after that, either the h- or the g-pawn arrived on the premises. Then came Re3, Qh5, and the next thing I knew I was looking like something out of 1001 Winning Chess Combinations. That wasn't the only such debacle, either; every time my opponent played one of these vile things I was behind on the clock as I worked on my conception of the wheel, and just as you'd expect some of my wheels came out square. Hopefully the remedy to this is obvious – you hold it in your hands.
2) I was bored by these openings: I didn't consider them interesting.
3) Not only did I not consider them interesting, I didn't consider them dangerous.
4) A less obvious point, this: to combat these openings successfully requires a good knowledge of many structures. A good chess education, in fact.
5) I didn't experience the adrenalin surge I got defending 'my' openings.
6) Lastly, I wasn't playing set-ups I was happy and had experience with.
John Cox
And a little tribute to England's most notable exponent of the system:
It personally brings back some memories of Michael Franklin at some quickplays in London I used to play at. A very strong player, and a very frustrating player to play against. Imagine fantastic quality Staunton sets, and that horrid London system bishop cutting across the diagonal, just waiting with its little cutesy pigeon hole on h2 made by the h3 move, to puncture the opponents pawn structure etc - and kill all the enthusiasm of the up and coming young players.Let's look at some specific lines.If you imagine Michael Franklin as a kind of chess Dracula, sucking all the enthusiasm and counterplay out of the position and his opponents, you begin to feel the nature of the opening and the people that really excel at using it. And yes even with a minority attack, those sorts of players will just wait to pounce on any weaknesses you dare create on the Queenside. They literally look forward to you entertaining them trying to attack them anywhere waiting to pounce on weaknesses created ...
Tryfon Gavriel
London main lines with 1.d4 d5
Symmetrical Variation
Nunn's Chess Openings gives the extremely unimpressive variation1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bf4 Bf5 4.e3 e6 5.Bd3 Bxd3 6.Qxd3 Bd6 7.Bxd6 Qxd6...
but putting a bit of pawn pressure on the centre with 4.c4 helps a lot. Conversely, Black may do best by playing an early ...c5 instead of copying White.
Two Knights Variation
This was reckoned to be the perfect defence against the London because of the line[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "2018.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "London System"] [Black "Two Knights"] [Result "*"] [ECO "D02"] [PlyCount "15"] [EventDate "2018.??.??"] 1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Bf4 c5 4. e3 Nc6 5. c3 Qb6 6. Qb3 c4 7. Qc2 (7. Qxb6 axb6 8. Na3 Ra5 (8... Rxa3 9. bxa3 Bf5)) 7... Bf5 8. Qc1 (8. Qxf5 Qxb2) *... Now if Qc2 Bf5! Qxf5? Qxb2!
So, rather than suffer the indignity of Qc2 Bf5! Qc1, White might take on b6. After 9.Na3 Black should probably keep the Knight out of b5 with 9...Ra5, but if I had this with Black I would be strongly tempted by 9...Rxa3!?
Tony Miles then started introducing the London with 2.Bf4. Now if Black tries the same idea, there may be trouble:
[Event "EU-ch 2nd"] [Site "Ohrid"] [Date "2001.06.06"] [Round "6"] [White "Miles, Anthony J"] [Black "Minasian, Ara"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "D00"] 1. d4 d5 2. Bf4 c5 3. e3 Nc6 4. c3 Qb6 5. Qb3 c4 6. Qc2 Bf5 7. Qxf5 Qxb2 8. Qxd5 Qc1+ 9. Ke2 Qb2+ 10. Kf3 Nf6 11. Qxc4 Qxa1 12. Qb3 O-O-O 13. Bb5 Na5 14. Qc2 a6 15. Bd3 e5 16. Bxe5 Nd7 17. Bf4 Be7 18. Nh3 g5 19. Nxg5 1-0So, J/K rolled out a repertoire book called Win with the London System, which heavily featured 2.Bf4, and it is in this form that it has become most popular recently.
However, Eric Prie wrote a scathing review of this book, saying it disregards or under-emphasises the best lines for Black.
https://www.chesspublishing.com/content/8/feb06.htm
Eric claims full equality for Black in several lines:
[Event "Moscow ol (Women)"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1994.??.??"]
[Round "10"]
[White "Kovalevskaya, Ekaterina"]
[Black "Kadimova, Ilaha"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B13"]
[WhiteElo "2290"]
[BlackElo "2355"]
[PlyCount "52"]
[EventDate "1994.??.??"]
[SourceTitle "EXT 1999"]
1. d4 (1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. exd5 cxd5 4. c3 Nf6 5. Bf4 Nc6 6. Nf3 Bf5 7. Qb3
Qc8 8. Be2 e6 9. O-O Be7 10. Nbd2 O-O 11. Rac1 Ne4 12. Rfe1 h6 13. Nxe4 Bxe4
14. Ne5 Bg5 (14... Bd6 $1 15. Nxc6 Qxc6 16. Bxd6 Qxd6 $15 {Prie}) 15. Bxg5 hxg5
16. Qd1 Ne7 17. c4 Qd8 18. Bg4 Bf5 19. Bf3 Rc8 20. Qb3 f6 21. Ng4 Nc6 22. Qd1
Nb4 23. Ne3 dxc4 24. Nxf5 exf5 25. Be2 b5 26. a4 a6 27. axb5 axb5 28. b3 Na2
29. Rc2 {1/2-1/2 (31) Kovalevskaya,E (2290)-Kadimova,I (2355) Moscow 1994} Nb4
30. Rc1 Na2 31. Rc2 {KK 94 OLW}) 1... d5 2. Bf4 c5 (2... Nf6 3. e3 c5 4. dxc5
Nc6 (4... Qa5+) 5. Bb5 (5. Nc3 e5 6. Bg5 Be6 7. Bxf6 gxf6 8. Qf3 Qa5 9. Bb5
O-O-O 10. Nge2 Rg8 11. Bxc6 bxc6 12. h3 Bxc5 13. g4 h5 14. O-O-O hxg4 15. Qxf6
Qc7 16. hxg4 Be7 17. Qf3 Bxg4 18. Qxf7 d4 19. f3 Rgf8 20. Qh7 Bf5 21. Qh6 dxc3
22. Nxc3 Rxd1+ 23. Rxd1 Rg8 24. Ne4 Kb7 25. Nd6+ Bxd6 26. Rxd6 Rg1+ 27. Rd1
Rxd1+ 28. Kxd1 Qh7 29. Qxh7+ Bxh7 30. Kd2 Kc7 31. c4 c5 32. Kc3 Bg6 33. a3 Bh5
34. f4 e4 35. b4 Kd6 36. Kb3 Bf7 37. Kc3 Be6 38. Kb3 Kc6 39. Kc3 Kb6 40. Kb3 a6
41. Kc3 Bg4 42. Kb2 a5 43. Kb3 a4+ 44. Kxa4 Bd1# {0-1 (44) Rowson,J (2599)
-Shaw,J (2432) Birmingham 2005}) 5... Qa5+ 6. Nc3 a6) 3. e3 (3. e4 $5 Nc6 (3...
Nf6 4. e5 Nfd7) 4. exd5 Qxd5 5. Nc3 Qf5 6. Qd2 cxd4 7. Nb5 e5 8. Nc7+ Kd8 9.
Nxa8 exf4 10. O-O-O Be6 11. Ne2 Bc5 12. Nxf4 Bxa2 13. g3 Bb4 14. Qe3 Bd6 15.
Rxd4 Nxd4 16. Qxd4 Qe5 17. Qd2 Nf6 18. Bg2 Kc8 19. Re1 Qc5 20. Re3 Kb8 21. Rc3
Qb4 22. Nd3 Qd4 23. Qg5 Kxa8 24. Qxg7 Re8 25. g4 Bb4 26. g5 Bxc3 27. bxc3 Qxc3
{0-1 (27) Rowson,J (2599)-Stojanovic,M (2522) Verona 2006}) 3... Nc6 4. c3 Nf6
(4... Qb6 5. Qb3 c4 6. Qc2 Bf5 7. Qxf5 Qxb2 8. Qxd5 Qc1+ 9. Ke2 Qb2+ 10. Kf3
Nf6 11. Qxc4 Qxa1 12. Qb3 O-O-O 13. Bb5 Na5 14. Qc2 a6 15. Bd3 e5 16. Bxe5 Nd7
17. Bf4 Be7 18. Nh3 g5 19. Nxg5 {1-0 (19) Miles,A (2562)-Minasian,A (2478)
Ohrid 2001 CBM 084 [Finkel,A]}) 5. Nd2 (5. Bd3 $6 Qb6 $1 6. Qb3 (6. Qc1) 6...
c4 7. Qxb6 axb6 8. Bc2 b5 9. Na3 b4 10. cxb4 c3 11. Nb5 Nxb4 12. Bb3 cxb2 13.
Rb1 Ra5 14. Kd1 Nd3 15. Bg3 Rxb5 16. Ba4 Bd7 17. Bxb5 Bxb5 18. f3 e6 19. Nh3
Ba3 20. Kc2 Ke7 21. Kb3 Rc8 22. Nf4 Bc4+ {0-1 (22) Israel,G (2149)-Geenen,M
(2356) Belgium 2005}) 5... Bf5 $1 (5... cxd4 6. exd4 (6. cxd4 Qb6) 6... Bf5 $1
7. Ngf3 e6 8. Qb3 Bd6 (8... Qc8 9. Nh4 Bg6 10. Nxg6 hxg6 11. h3 Be7 12. Bd3 a6
13. a4 Nh5 14. Bh2 {1/2-1/2 (14) Gonda,L (2448)-Erdos,V (2522) Budapest HUN 2005}
Bd8 $1 15. O-O Bc7 $1 {and Prie prefers Black's structure}) 9. Bxd6 Qxd6 10.
Be2 (10. Qxb7 O-O 11. Bb5 Ne7 12. Qa6 Qc7 13. Bd3 Rfb8 14. Bxf5 Nxf5 15. Rb1
Rb6 16. Qe2 Rab8 17. Nb3 Ne4 18. O-O a5 19. Nxa5 Qa7 20. Nc4 Nxc3 21. Qc2 Nxb1
22. Nxb6 Na3 23. bxa3 Qxb6 24. Rd1 g6 25. h3 Ra8 26. Rd3 Kg7 27. Qd2 Rc8 28.
Rb3 Qc6 29. Kh2 Qc7+ 30. g3 Qc2 31. Qxc2 Rxc2 {()-() (71) Tang,A (2466)-Li,R
(2564) chess.com INT 2017}) 10... O-O 11. O-O Rab8) 6. Qb3 Qd7 $1 7. Ngf3 (7.
dxc5 e5 8. Bg3 Bxc5 9. Ngf3 Bd6 10. Bb5 Qc7 (10... Qe7)) 7... c4 $1 8. Qd1 e6
9. Be2 b5 10. Nh4 Bd6 11. Bxd6 Qxd6 12. Nxf5 exf5 13. Qc2 Ne4 14. Nxe4 fxe4 15.
a4 b4 16. b3 cxb3 17. Qxb3 O-O 18. O-O Rab8 19. cxb4 Nxb4 (19... Rxb4 $5) 20.
Qa3 f5 21. g3 g5 22. Rac1 f4 23. gxf4 gxf4 24. Kh1 f3 25. Rg1+ $4 (25. Bb5)
25... Kh8 26. Bf1 Nd3 {0-1 (26) Muranyi,K (2339)-Saric,A (2597) Germany 2015}
1/2-1/2
Eric declares the early ...c5 system a complete solution for Black.
(Black can even try a very early ...c5 with 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 c5!? to which some players have replied in the spirit of the Albin Counter-Gambit with 3.e4!?, but I'm by no means sure who has more to fear there.)
All-purpose System
Straightforward solid development ought to be OK but, after an early ...e6, White can sometimes whip out an attack on the King's-side, using e5 to hold down the Black position. It can look like an improved Stonewall Attack![Event "US op"] [Site "?"] [Date "2001.??.??"] [Round "2"] [White "Blatny, Pavel"] [Black "Luchan, Jason"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "D02"] [WhiteElo "2475"] [BlackElo "2110"] [PlyCount "35"] [EventDate "2001.??.??"] [SourceTitle "CBM 083 ext"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 d5 3. Bf4 e6 4. e3 c5 5. c3 Nc6 6. Nbd2 Bd6 7. Bg3 O-O 8. Bd3 Re8 9. Ne5 Qe7 10. f4 Nd7 11. Ndf3 f6 12. Bh4 Nf8 13. O-O Qc7 14. Ng4 Qe7 15. Nfe5 Bd7 16. Bxf6 gxf6 17. Nh6+ Kg7 18. Qg4+ 1-0I couldn't find Kovacevic-Cox but it may have looked and felt a bit like that game...
Cox and others recommend equalising with 6...Bd6, as Michael Adams likes to do. In theory, White should welcome exchanging Black's better Bishop, but has to waste a move with either Bxd6 or Bg3 or suffer a muddling of the pawns on f4. Ne5 sometimes works, blocking the exchange, but a bit of analysis suggested 7.Ne5 is not great now.
In general, White won't mind ...Bxg3 or even...Nxg3, when hxg3 opens the h-file for a Rook on h1, but after castling, will want to avoid the doubled pawns by a preliminary h2-h3.
[Event "78th Tata Steel GpA"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2016.??.??"]
[Round "10"]
[White "Karjakin, Sergey"]
[Black "Adams, Mi"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D02"]
[WhiteElo "2765"]
[BlackElo "2740"]
[PlyCount "62"]
[EventDate "2016.??.??"]
1. d4 Nf6 2. Bf4 d5 3. e3 e6 4. Nf3 c5 5. c3 Nc6 6. Nbd2 Bd6 (6... cxd4 7. exd4
(7. cxd4) 7... Nh5 8. Bg5 f6 9. Be3 Bd6 10. Bb5 O-O 11. O-O) 7. Bg3 O-O 8. Bd3
b6 9. Ne5 (9. e4 dxe4 (9... Be7 10. e5 Nh5 11. Ng5 $5 (11. a3 {Williams}) 11...
Bxg5 12. Qxh5 g6 13. Qe2 cxd4 14. h4 Bh6 (14... Bxd2+ 15. Qxd2 dxc3 16. bxc3 d4
17. c4 Qe7 18. Rb1 h5 19. Bf4 Bb7 20. O-O Rfc8 21. Bg5 Qf8 22. Bf6 Ne7 23. Qg5
Nf5 24. Bxf5 exf5 25. e6 Kh7 26. e7 Qe8 27. Rfd1 Rxc4 28. Rxd4 Rxd4 29. Bxd4
Qc6 30. Rd1 Qd6 31. Rd2 Re8 32. Be3 Qxe7 33. Qh6+ Kg8 34. Bd4 f6 35. Qxg6+ Kf8
36. Bxf6 {1-0 (36) Van Foreest,J (2615)-Svane,R (2552) Germany 2016}) 15. h5
dxc3 16. bxc3 Bg7) 10. Nxe4 Nxe4 11. Bxe4 Bb7 12. dxc5 Bxc5 13. Qxd8 (13. O-O))
9... Bb7 10. f4 Ne7 11. Qf3 Nf5 12. Bf2 Be7 13. g4 Nd6 14. g5 Nfe4 15. O-O-O c4
16. Bc2 b5 17. Qh3 b4 18. Nxe4 dxe4 19. Be1 Bd5 20. Rg1 b3 21. axb3 cxb3 22.
Bb1 f5 23. gxf6 Bxf6 24. Rg4 Nf5 25. Kd2 Qa5 26. Ke2 Bxe5 27. dxe5 Rad8 28. Kf2
Qa1 29. Bd2 Bc4 30. Qh5 Qxb2 31. Ke1 Rxd2 0-1
But White found a fabulous idea in the main line:
[Event "23rd Eastern Class"] [Site "?"] [Date "2014.??.??"] [Round "4"] [White "Kamsky, Gata"] [Black "Shankland, Sam"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "D02"] [WhiteElo "2705"] [BlackElo "2610"] [PlyCount "61"] [EventDate "2014.??.??"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. Bf4 d5 3. e3 e6 4. Nd2 c5 5. c3 Nc6 6. Ngf3 Bd6 7. Bg3 O-O 8. Bd3 Qe7 9. Ne5 Nd7 10. Nxd7 Bxd7 11. Bxd6 Qxd6 12. dxc5 Qxc5 13. Bxh7+ Kxh7 14. Qh5+ Kg8 15. Ne4 Qc4 16. Ng5 Rfd8 17. Qxf7+ Kh8 18. Qh5+ Kg8 19. Rd1 e5 20. Qf7+ Kh8 21. e4 Ne7 22. Qxe7 Bb5 23. Rd2 Qxa2 24. Qf7 Qa1+ 25. Rd1 Qxb2 26. Qh5+ Kg8 27. Qh7+ Kf8 28. Qh8+ Ke7 29. Qxg7+ Kd6 30. Rxd5+ Kc6 31. Qf6+ 1-0So, avoid that for sure!
Another trap:
[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Enter New Game"] [Black "?"] [Result "*"] [PlyCount "23"] [EventType "swiss"] 1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Bf4 c5 4. e3 Nc6 5. c3 e6 6. Nbd2 Bd6 7. Bb5 a6 $2 8. Bxc6+ bxc6 9. Qa4 Bb7 $2 10. Bxd6 Qxd6 11. Qa3 Nd7 12. Nb3 *J/K give
[Event "Izmir GP op"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2002.??.??"]
[Round "4"]
[White "Vasilev, Milen"]
[Black "Demirel, Tolga"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D02"]
[WhiteElo "2445"]
[BlackElo "2165"]
[PlyCount "98"]
[EventDate "2002.??.??"]
[SourceTitle "CBM 090 ext"]
1. d4 d5 2. Bf4 Nf6 3. e3 c5 4. c3 Nc6 5. Nd2 e6 6. Ngf3 Bd6 7. Ne5 Qc7 8. Bb5
Bd7 (8... O-O 9. Bxc6 bxc6 10. O-O Ba6 (10... Rb8) 11. Re1 Rab8 12. Nb3 c4 13.
Nc5 Bxc5 14. dxc5 g5 $2 (14... Qb7) 15. Ng4 gxf4 16. Nxf6+ Kg7 17. Nh5+ Kh8 18.
exf4 f6 19. Rxe6 Qf7 20. Rxf6 {1-0 1-0 (20) De Rooi,P-Haldane,R Guernsey 1987})
9. Nxd7 Nxd7 10. Bxd6 Qxd6 $11 11. O-O (11. Qg4 O-O 12. f4 Nf6 (12... f5 13.
Qe2 a6) (12... a6 13. Be2 b5 (13... f5)) 13. Qf3 Ne7 14. Bd3 Qb6 15. Rb1 $14)
11... O-O 12. f4 a6 13. Bd3 c4 14. Bc2 f5 15. Nf3 b5 16. a3 Ra7 17. Qe1 a5 18.
Qh4 Qe7 19. Qh3 Nf6 20. Kh1 Rb7 21. Ng5 g6 22. Qh4 Rfb8 23. h3 b4 24. axb4 axb4
25. Ra6 Rb6 26. Rxb6 Rxb6 27. Ra1 Kg7 28. Ra8 bxc3 29. bxc3 h6 30. Ba4 Nd8 31.
Nf3 Nf7 32. Kh2 Qb7 33. Ra5 Ra6 34. Rb5 Qd7 35. Ne5 Nxe5 36. dxe5 Ng8 37. Ra5
Qa7 38. Rxa6 Qxa6 39. Bd7 Qb6 40. Qg3 Kf7 41. h4 Qd8 42. Bxe6+ Kxe6 43. Qxg6+
Kd7 44. Qxf5+ Kc6 45. Qe6+ Kb5 46. g3 Ne7 47. f5 h5 48. f6 Nc6 49. f7 Ne7 1-0
and then suggest
(11. Qg4 O-O 12. f4 Nf6 13. Qf3 Ne7 14. Bd3 Qb6 15. Rb1 +=)
This is typical of repertoire books: a failry long line is given as += without suggesting where Black might have gone wrong. I don't dispute the final +=, but if you want to play this for Black, you can certainly try the same plans as in the game: 12...a6 and then either 13...f5 stopping White's f-pawn or 13...b5 starting queenside play, or both. The authors do not suggest that these ideas were mistaken nor give any argument for getting the Queen in front of the b-pawn with ...Qb6. There are so many moves and variations in that book, but you come away thinking that fewer moves and more thinking would have made a much better book! But maybe not one so easy to produce.
You can abandon all finesse with Aagaard and Lund's 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 e6 3.Bf4 Bd6, which they consider easily equal. Instead, 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 e6 3.e3 Bd6 4.Bxd6 Qxd6 5.Qg4!? is a try for advantage, perhaps the only one.
London lines against Indian systems
London vs Grunfeld
Only as I was driving over, thinking through how to structure this talk, I realised I had omitted looking at the Grunfeld set-up. Let me repair my omission here:
[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2018.08.29"]
[Round "?"]
[White "London"]
[Black "Grunfeld"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "D02"]
[PlyCount "57"]
[EventDate "2018.??.??"]
[SourceDate "2018.08.29"]
[SourceVersionDate "2018.08.29"]
1. d4 d5 2. Bf4 Nf6 3. Nf3 g6 4. e3 Bg7 5. Be2 (5. Bd3 c5 6. c3 Nc6 7. Nbd2 O-O
8. h3 Nd7 {as in the main game} 9. O-O e5 10. dxe5 Ndxe5 {Here White has the
extra option} 11. Bc2 h6 12. Nxe5 Nxe5 13. e4 dxe4 {White gets an edge after
this natural move} (13... d4) (13... Be6) 14. Nxe4 b6 15. Nd6 $1 Qf6 16. Bxe5
Qxe5 17. Re1 Qg5 18. Be4 Rb8 19. Bd5 Bxh3 20. Nxf7 Rxf7 21. Bxf7+ Kh7 22. Qd5
Bf5 23. Rad1 Bf6 24. Re8 Rxe8 25. Bxe8 {1-0 (25) Kharlov,A (2615)-Hillarp
Persson,T (2507) Skelleftea 1999}) 5... O-O 6. O-O c5 (6... c6 {is solid and
neither threatening nor inspiring} 7. h3 Nbd7 8. c4 dxc4 9. Bxc4 c5 $1 $146 {
keeps White to a minimal edge.} (9... Nb6 10. Bb3 Bf5 11. Nc3 Nbd5 12. Bh2 Rc8
13. Rc1 $14) 10. Bh2 cxd4 (10... b6)) 7. c3 Nc6 8. Nbd2 Nd7 {This is the
classic Grunfeld manoeuvre, but in an unusual context.} (8... Nh5 9. Bg5 h6 10.
Bh4 g5 11. Ne1 Nf6 12. Bg3 Nd7 13. Nd3 (13. Bf3 $5 $146 {J/K}) 13... c4 14. Ne1
e5 $11 {is the main line given by J/K, but these moves are barely explored.})
9. Qb3 (9. h3 e5 $1 $11) 9... e5 $6 (9... c4 10. Qa3 b5 11. b3) 10. dxe5 Ndxe5
11. Nxe5 Nxe5 12. Rad1 Be6 13. Qxb7 $5 Qa5 $6 (13... Rb8 14. Qxa7 Rxb2 15. Qxc5
Qa8 $11) 14. Qa6 Qxa6 15. Bxa6 c4 16. Bxe5 Bxe5 17. e4 Rab8 18. exd5 Bxd5 19.
Bxc4 Bc6 20. Nb3 Rfc8 21. Rfe1 Bf6 22. Bd5 Be8 23. g3 a5 24. Nxa5 Rxb2 25. Nc4
Rbb8 26. Nd6 Rd8 27. Rxe8+ Rxe8 28. Bxf7+ Kf8 29. Bxe8 {1-0 (29) Anastasian,A
(2475)-Sobolewski,P (2305) Leningrad 1990} *
London vs King's Indian
This is where we came in. I have a suspicion that going for ...e5, as recommended by Gallagher, plays into White's hands a little, while ...c5, as recommended by Dembo, is less easy for White to play against. But I expect both should equalise; White's system is too indirect.
[Event "Bugojno"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1978.??.??"]
[Round "25"]
[White "Spassky B"]
[Black "Bukic E"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "A48"]
[PlyCount "58"]
[EventDate "1978.??.??"]
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 g6 3. Bf4 Bg7 4. e3 O-O 5. Be2 d6 6. O-O Nbd7 (6... Nfd7 $1 {
Sielecki} 7. h3 e5 8. Bh2 exd4 (8... Nc6 9. c4 f5 10. Nc3 Kh8 11. Rb1 g5 12.
dxe5 dxe5 13. b4 e4 14. Nd4 Nxd4 15. exd4 Nb6 16. c5 Nd5 17. Nxd5 Qxd5 18. Bxc7
Be6 19. Bd6 Rf7 20. Rc1 Qxa2 21. Rc2 Qb3 22. Qd2 f4 23. Bh5 Rd7 24. Re1 Qd5 25.
Qe2 Qxd4 26. Rd2 Qxb4 27. c6 Rxd6 28. Rxd6 Qxd6 29. Qxe4 Bg8 30. cxb7 Rb8 31.
Bf3 a5 32. Qf5 a4 33. Qc8 Qf8 34. Qc7 a3 35. Bg4 a2 36. Bc8 Rxb7 37. Bxb7 a1=Q
38. Rxa1 Bxa1 39. Be4 Bd4 40. Qd7 Qc5 {0-1 (40) Plaskett,H (2483)-Hunt,A (2411)
West Bromwich 2003}) 9. exd4 Nc6 10. c4 Qf6 $5) 7. h3 Qe8 8. c4 e5 9. Bh2 Qe7
10. Nc3 e4 11. Nd2 Re8 12. Nb5 Qd8 13. c5 a6 14. cxd6 axb5 15. dxc7 Qe7 16.
Bxb5 Bf8 17. Nc4 Qe6 18. Qc2 Qd5 19. a4 Re6 20. Rfc1 Ne8 21. Qc3 Nef6 22. Ne5
Nb6 23. Nc4 Nfd7 24. Qb3 Rf6 25. Bxd7 Nxd7 26. Qb5 Qf5 27. Bg3 Rfa6 28. d5 Qf6
29. a5 h5 1-0
[Event "Lloyds Bank op"] [Site "?"] [Date "1991.??.??"] [Round "8"] [White "Franklin, Michael J"] [Black "Vujatovic, Rajko"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "A48"] [WhiteElo "2285"] [PlyCount "44"] [EventDate "1991.??.??"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 g6 3. Bf4 Bg7 4. e3 d6 5. Nbd2 O-O 6. Bc4 Nc6 7. c3 Qe8 8. e4 Bg4 9. Qc2 e5 10. dxe5 Nh5 11. Be3 Nxe5 12. Be2 f5 13. exf5 Bxf5 14. Qb3+ Be6 15. Qxb7 Nf4 16. Bxf4 Nd3+ 17. Kf1 Nxf4 18. Re1 Qa4 19. Qa6 Qc2 20. Bd1 Qxb2 21. g3 Rae8 22. Kg1 Qxd2 0-1
[Event "EU Union-ch Liverpool"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2006.??.??"]
[Round "9"]
[White "Dgebuadze, Alexandre"]
[Black "Gormally, Daniel"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A48"]
[WhiteElo "2525"]
[BlackElo "2510"]
[PlyCount "56"]
[EventDate "2006.??.??"]
[SourceTitle "CBM 114 ext"]
1. d4 Nf6 (1... d5 2. c4 e5 3. dxe5 d4 4. Nf3 Nc6 5. g3) 2. Nf3 (2. Bf4 g6 3.
Nc3 {Williams} d5 4. f3 c5 (4... Bg7 5. e4) 5. e4 dxe4 (5... cxd4 6. Qxd4 $14)
6. d5 {cf. Albin Williams extols this idea but it's got 0/3 on my database!}
exf3 7. Nxf3 Bg7) 2... g6 3. Bf4 Bg7 4. e3 O-O 5. h3 d6 6. Be2 c5 7. c3 Be6 8.
O-O Qb6 9. Qc2 Nc6 10. Nbd2 Rac8 11. dxc5 Qxc5 12. Rfe1 d5 13. Qb3 Na5 14. Qa4
Qb6 15. b4 Nc6 16. Rac1 Bd7 17. Qb3 Rfe8 18. a3 e5 19. Bh2 Bf5 20. Bf1 Qd8 21.
Qa2 e4 22. Nd4 Nxd4 23. cxd4 g5 24. Rxc8 Bxc8 25. Qc2 g4 26. Qc7 Qxc7 27. Bxc7
gxh3 28. gxh3 Nh5 0-1
London vs Modern
I think White is well-advised to try a different move order here. Black can get in ...e5 quickly and easily, and other attempts by White are not convincing.[Event "Czech League"] [Site "?"] [Date "1996.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Kozak, M."] [Black "Vokac, M."] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "A41"] [PlyCount "110"] [EventDate "1996.??.??"] 1. Nf3 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Bf4 d6 4. e3 Nd7 5. h3 e5 6. Bh2 exd4 7. exd4 Ne7 8. Bd3 O-O 9. O-O Nf6 10. Nbd2 Bf5 11. Bxf5 Nxf5 12. Re1 Qd7 13. c3 h5 14. Ne4 Nxe4 15. Rxe4 Rae8 16. Qd3 Rxe4 17. Qxe4 Qb5 18. Qc2 Re8 19. Re1 Rxe1+ 20. Nxe1 Qe8 21. Kf1 Qe6 22. Qb3 Qe4 23. Qc2 Qe6 24. Qb3 Qe4 25. Qc2 Qc6 26. Qe2 Bh6 27. Nd3 a5 28. Bf4 Nxd4 29. cxd4 Bxf4 30. d5 Qc4 31. b3 Qd4 32. Nxf4 Qxf4 33. Qc2 Qd4 34. Kg1 Qc5 35. Qd2 c6 36. dxc6 bxc6 37. Kh2 d5 38. f4 Qb4 39. Qe3 Qe4 40. Qc1 d4 41. Kg3 Qe2 42. Qxc6 Qe3+ 43. Kh2 Qxf4+ 44. g3 Qe5 45. Qf3 h4 46. Kg2 Qxg3+ 47. Qxg3 hxg3 48. Kxg3 Kf8 49. Kf3 f5 50. h4 Ke7 51. a3 Kd6 52. Kf4 Kd5 53. Kf3 Ke5 54. Kf2 Ke4 55. Ke2 f4 0-1
[Event "Wiesbaden"] [Site "?"] [Date "1981.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Koch, R."] [Black "Nunn, J."] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "A41"] [PlyCount "70"] [EventDate "1981.??.??"] [SourceTitle "Starting Out: The Modern"] 1. d4 g6 2. Nf3 Bg7 3. Bf4 d6 4. e3 Nd7 5. Bc4 e5 6. dxe5 dxe5 7. Bxf7+ Kxf7 8. Ng5+ Ke7 9. Qd5 Nh6 10. Qe6+ Kf8 11. Qd5 c6 12. Ne6+ Ke7 13. Bg5+ Bf6 14. Qc4 Nb6 15. Bxf6+ Kxf6 16. Qh4+ Kxe6 17. Qxh6 Qf8 18. Qh4 Qe7 19. Qe4 Nd5 20. O-O Kf7 21. Nd2 Kg7 22. c4 Bf5 23. Qf3 Nf6 24. e4 Rhd8 25. Qe3 Be6 26. Qc3 Rd4 27. f4 Rad8 28. fxe5 Ng4 29. Nb3 Rxc4 30. Qg3 Rxe4 31. Rae1 Rxe1 32. Rxe1 Qb4 33. h3 Rd3 34. Qh4 Qb6+ 35. Kh1 Rxh3+ 0-1
London vs ...e6.
"It is more pleasant to play Bf4 once Black has played e6". - Magnus Carlsen.Black has a fair choice of systems here
Sielicki recommends going for a Hedgehog set-up against the London with ...e6 and ...d6. ...
[Event "d-Pawn Specials"] [Site "?"] [Date "2011.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "London System"] [Black "vs ...e6"] [Result "*"] [ECO "A47"] [PlyCount "26"] 1. d4 Nf6 (1... e6 2. Nf3 c5 3. c3 Nc6 $1 4. Bf4 $6 cxd4 5. cxd4 Qb6 6. Qb3 Qxb3 7. axb3 Nf6 8. Nc3) 2. Nf3 e6 3. Bf4 b6 (3... c5 4. c3 (4. e3 cxd4 $1 5. exd4 b6 6. Nbd2 Be7 7. h3 O-O 8. Bd3 Ba6 $5 9. Bxa6 Nxa6 10. O-O b5) 4... cxd4 (4... Nc6 $5 5. e3 b6 6. Bd3 Bb7 7. Nbd2 Nh5) 5. cxd4 b5 $5 (5... Qb6 $1)) 4. e3 Bb7 5. Bd3 $1 (5. h3 $6 d6 $1 6. Nbd2 (6. c4 Ne4) 6... Nbd7 7. Bd3 g6 $1 8. Qe2 Bg7 9. O-O O-O) 5... c5 6. c3 Be7 7. h3 d6 (7... cxd4 8. exd4 (8. cxd4 $1) 8... O-O 9. O-O Ba6 $1 10. Bxa6 Nxa6 11. Qd3 Qc8 12. Nbd2 Qb7) 8. Nbd2 cxd4 9. exd4 (9. cxd4 $1) 9... O-O 10. Qe2 a6 11. O-O Nbd7 12. Rfe1 Re8 (12... b5 13. Rad1 Nb6 (13... Qc7 14. Bh2 Qc6)) 13. Rad1 Bf8 *He claims it's easier for Black to find ways to expand than for White.
Prie suggests replying to ...cxd4 with cxd4
If that's a risk Black can just play ...c5 and ...cxd4 very early:
1.d4 e6 2.Bf4 c5 3.e3 Nf6 4.Nf3 cxd4 5.exd4
and if White insists on c3 then one line is to swap and play ...b5 (Martin, Cox).
1.d4 e6 2.Bf4 c5 3.c3 Nf6 4.Nf3 cxd4 5.exd4 b5
In fairness to Johanssen et al, they do point out an equalising line for Black with ...e6, which gains time by threatening to round up the Bishop:
1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.Bf4 Be7!
threat ...Nh5. The only way to preserve the Bishop is
4.h3
but this is slow and gives Black time for development.
4...c5 5.e3 (5.c3 cxd4 6.cxd4 d5=) Qb6 5.Qc1 Nc6=
So, better is
2.Bf4 e6 3.e3
and it's likely to transpose to something we have seen already. If White wants to block the exchange of dark-squared Bishops after ...d5/...Bd6 with Ne5, then Ngf3 has to happen fairly soon.
A line to be avoided is
[Event "SPICE Cup Open blitz"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2016.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Ashwin, Jayaram"]
[Black "Colas, Joshua"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "A46"]
[WhiteElo "2465"]
[BlackElo "2335"]
[Annotator "Eric Rosen"]
[PlyCount "41"]
[EventDate "2016.??.??"]
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. Bf4 c5 4. e3 b6 5. Nbd2 Bb7 6. Nc4 d5? 7. Nce5 c4 8. Ng5
Qe7 9. c3 h6 10. Ngxf7 Rg8 11. Be2 Nbd7 12. Nxd7 Kxd7 13. Qa4+ Kc8 14. Nd6+ Kd8
15. b3 cxb3 16. axb3 a5 17. Qb5 Qc7 18. Nc4 Qc8 19. Qxb6+ Ke8 20. Nd2 Qxc3 21.
Bb5+ {1-0 Black resigns.} 1-0
Miserable, but while I've seen 6.Nc4 given as += I expect 6...cxd4 7. exd4 d6 may be perfectly playable. In the game, 7...Bd6 8.Bb5+ Kf8 is more defensible.
Eric Prie suggests, contra Carlsen, that 1.d4 e6 2.Bf4 is not so threatening for Black, as 2...c5 and 3...Qb6 is not convenient to meet.
[Event "Moscow ol (Women)"] [Site "?"] [Date "2018.??.??"] [Round "10"] [White "London System"] [Black "1...e6"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [ECO "D00"] [PlyCount "10"] [EventDate "2018.??.??"] [SourceTitle "EXT 1999"] 1. d4 e6 2. Bf4 $6 c5 $1 3. e3 (3. c3 Qb6 $1 4. Qb3 cxd4 (4... Qxb3 5. axb3 cxd4 6. cxd4 Nc6 7. e3) 5. Qxb6 axb6 6. cxd4 Nc6 7. e3 Nb4) 3... Qb6 $1 4. Nc3 Nf6 5. Nf3 a6 1/2-1/2
Another trap:
[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Enter New Game"] [Black "?"] [Result "*"] [PlyCount "23"] [EventType "swiss"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. Bf4 c5 4. e3 Qb6 5. Nc3 $1 Qxb2 $2 6. Nb5 Na6 ( 6... Nd5 7. Rb1 Qxa2 8. Ra1 Qb2 9. Bc4) 7. a3*
London vs Dutch
Soltis disparages White's chances, as Black is well-placed to play ...e5, while J/K concede that Black is fine after[Event "USA ch-U20 New York"] [Site "?"] [Date "1983.??.??"] [Round "2"] [White "Benjamin, Joel"] [Black "Wolff, Patrick G"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "A80"] [WhiteElo "2475"] [BlackElo "2275"] [PlyCount "119"] [EventDate "1983.??.??"] [SourceTitle "EXT 2004"] 1. d4 f5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Bf4 e6 4. e3 Be7 5. h3 d6 6. Bd3 Nc6 7. c4 O-O 8. Nc3 Qe8 9. Bh2 Bd8 10. d5 Nb4 11. dxe6 Nxd3+ 12. Qxd3 Bxe6 13. Nd4 Ne4 $11 14. O-O Bd7 15. Rad1 Qg6 16. Nce2 Kh8 17. b4 a5 18. f3 Ng5 19. Nf4 Qf7 20. b5 b6 21. Nd5 Ne6 22. e4 f4 23. Ne2 Bg5 24. Qc3 Rad8 25. Nc1 Bf6 26. Nxf6 Qxf6 27. Qxf6 Rxf6 28. Ne2 Rf7 29. Rd5 Rdf8 30. e5 dxe5 31. Rxe5 Nc5 32. Rd1 Be6 33. Rd4 Rd7 34. Rxd7 Bxd7 35. Nxf4 c6 36. bxc6 Bxc6 37. Nd5 Rd8 38. Re7 Kg8 39. Be5 Bxd5 40. Bc7 Rd7 41. Rxd7 Nxd7 42. cxd5 a4 43. Kf2 Nf6 44. d6 Nd7 45. Ke3 b5 46. Kd4 b4 47. Kc4 b3 48. axb3 axb3 49. Kxb3 Kf7 50. Kc4 Ke6 51. Kd4 Nf6 52. g4 g6 53. Kc4 Nd7 54. f4 h6 55. Kd4 Nf6 56. Kc5 Kd7 57. f5 gxf5 58. gxf5 Ne4+ 59. Kd5 Ng5 60. Bb6 1-0
The Stonewall Dutch is unattractive after Bf4 ...
[Event "Pan American"] [Site "San Felipe"] [Date "1998.10.30"] [Round "5"] [White "Serper, Grigory"] [Black "Sequera Paolini, Jose"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "A84"] [WhiteElo "2535"] [BlackElo "2340"] [PlyCount "61"] [EventDate "1998.10.25"] 1. c4 e6 2. Nc3 d5 3. d4 f5 4. Nf3 c6 5. Bf4 Nf6 6. e3 Be7 7. Bd3 O-O 8. Qc2 Ne4 9. g4 Qa5 10. Ke2 Kh8 11. Rhg1 Nd7 12. Rg2 Ndf6 13. Rag1 Ne8 14. Ne5 N4d6 15. c5 Ne4 16. f3 Nxc3+ 17. bxc3 Bf6 18. h4 Qd8 19. h5 Be7 20. gxf5 exf5 21. h6 Bf6 22. hxg7+ Nxg7 23. Bh6 Qe7 24. Bxg7+ Bxg7 25. Rxg7 Qxg7 26. Rxg7 Kxg7 27. Qb1 Kh8 28. Qh1 Kg7 29. Qh4 Be6 30. Qe7+ Bf7 31. Bxf5 1-0
...but the Leningrad can be essayed. Before you see Nf3, watch out for ideas of h4 by White.
Move orders
We have learned that 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bf4 may be improved by 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4.But after 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3, 2...d5! May give White a problem
And is 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bf4 too early to show White's hand?
White can try to hand back the problem with
1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 d5 3.c3!?
...hoping that Black might allow a decent version of the London or perhaps the Torre. Cox and Ladkawala each discuss this move order; the Rowson-Haslinger game may be a pain for Black but there's nothing wrong with 5...Nf6 first and then 6...Bd6
Transpositions
The transpositions that I know about and I think are the most important are:
Queen's Gambit Declined Blackburne Variation
1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bf4 e6 4.e3 Be7 5.c4 O-O 6.Nc3
is the same as
1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4.Bf4 Be7 5.Nc3 O-O 6.c4
Queen's Gambit Slav Defence Exchange Variation
1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bf4 c5 4.c3 cxd4 5.cxd4 Nc6
is the same as
1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.cxd5 cxd5 5.Bf4 Nc6
Caro-Kann Defence Exchange Variation
1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bf4 c5 4.e3 cxd4 5.exd4 Nc6
is the same as
1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bf4 Nf6 5.Nf3 Nc6
Queen's Indian Miles Variation
1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.Bf4 b6 4.c4
is the same as
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 b6 4.Bf4
And I expect with some cooperation on both sides, we could get to the Bf4 lines against the Benoni.
Bibliography
WATTS/MAROCZY (ed. Regis) The International Chess Tournament London 1922
SOLTIS Winning with the London System
JOHANSSEN et al. Win with the London System
LADKAWALA The London System Move by Move
NUNN et al. Nunn's Chess Openings
AAGAARD & LUND Defending 1.d4
COX Dealing with 1.d4 Deviations
GALLAGHER Beating the Anti-King's-Indians
DEMBO Fighting the Anti-King's-Indians
BOROS Bust the London System! | Strategy Session https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nj6Im1MVh_o
SIELECKI Fight the London System with Black Pt 3 - ...Nf6 e6 Setups (Nimzo, Queens Indian) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YARzPWgDSQ (featuring the 'headshock')
Also on YouTube: Simon Williams has posted some summaries of chapters from his DVD and an update on developments since the DVD came out.
