It's fine for a strong player to have as a part of their arsenal (though generally they'd prefer something else as their main weapon), but the problem is that beginners learn a basic London setup to try and avoid learning theory, and in doing so avoid exposing themselves to the variety of pawn structures that they need to experience in order to improve as a player. Variety is also fun, and it can get stale to only ever play one setup, and boring for your opponents if they keep having to play yet another London player rather than any of the other fun varieties that are available.
Professional players and even serious enthusiasts need something they can rely on. Doesn't need to be sexy or flashy. So as long what they do bring in the points
The Catalan is awesome. A rank begginer might struggle with closed positions and positional play so I'd always recomend starting out with e4, but the catalan still gives you a variety of different pawn structures that will aid your improvement.
I'm not disputing that the London can be more tactical, or even arguing their respective merits (though the Catalan is considered a better try at the top level, pretty much anything is a draw with computers). My point is simply that the London regularly leads to the same London pawn structure, whereas other openings have more variety in where the pawns end up, and playing against different pawn structures (so that you can learn different plans) is a big part of how you improve as a player.
Andras Toth has a great video on the subject if you want to check it out (it's called what's wrong with the london, automod wouldn't let me include a link).
Variety more than anything. I mostly play e4, but have had a surge of strength recently that I attribute to incorperating the occasional Catalan (which I don't remotely know the theory for), which is forcing my lazy brain to think during the opening rather than just playing moves. With that in mind, I am planning to add even more variety to my repoitoire. Right now I mostly play the Kings Indian against d4 (which is a lot of fun, and has the bonus of having a variety of pawn structures to force me to think) and the occasional Benko, but plan to add d5 in the near future, and maybe the Nimzo at some point down the line. I play the dragon against e4 (which I love, but would recomend the accelerated dragon instead as it's less theoretically demanding) as well as the occasional schvechnikov, but am working on incorperating the Najorf and e5.
For context I started at 400ish blitz a few years ago and am 1800 now, though I feel I could have improved faster if I spent more time studying master games and learning theory (I know some people advise against it, but I truly think it helps your overall understanding and tactical awareness) and less time playing endless blitz games.
Kinda just a dull opening, the epitome of beginners’ “push pawns in the middle and develop your minor pieces” mentality, nothing really happens, no cool traps or anything.
Change it to Kings Gambit, and you got yourself a meme 👉🏼
I play the chess.
The meme supposed that at least two women are interested in chess and I'm very happy with this
Do not fear the man that has learned one thousand chess moves, fear the man that has done one chess opening one thousand times. -Sun Tzu
London is sound. What's the problem with it?
It's fine for a strong player to have as a part of their arsenal (though generally they'd prefer something else as their main weapon), but the problem is that beginners learn a basic London setup to try and avoid learning theory, and in doing so avoid exposing themselves to the variety of pawn structures that they need to experience in order to improve as a player. Variety is also fun, and it can get stale to only ever play one setup, and boring for your opponents if they keep having to play yet another London player rather than any of the other fun varieties that are available.
Would same apply for other non-theory based openings like the double fianchetto?
I agree on the variety argument for those who play it, but for opponents... I mean... too bad, so sad.
Professional players and even serious enthusiasts need something they can rely on. Doesn't need to be sexy or flashy. So as long what they do bring in the points
I feel personally attacked.
Because you're right.
Then how about Catalan?
The Catalan is awesome. A rank begginer might struggle with closed positions and positional play so I'd always recomend starting out with e4, but the catalan still gives you a variety of different pawn structures that will aid your improvement.
But so far London lines are sharper. Catalan style is like squeeze. Both are positional chess.
[removed]
External Links not Allowed.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
I'm not disputing that the London can be more tactical, or even arguing their respective merits (though the Catalan is considered a better try at the top level, pretty much anything is a draw with computers). My point is simply that the London regularly leads to the same London pawn structure, whereas other openings have more variety in where the pawns end up, and playing against different pawn structures (so that you can learn different plans) is a big part of how you improve as a player.
Andras Toth has a great video on the subject if you want to check it out (it's called what's wrong with the london, automod wouldn't let me include a link).
Hmmm. Any opening that really help you improved? I always play London as white and caro kann as black.
Variety more than anything. I mostly play e4, but have had a surge of strength recently that I attribute to incorperating the occasional Catalan (which I don't remotely know the theory for), which is forcing my lazy brain to think during the opening rather than just playing moves. With that in mind, I am planning to add even more variety to my repoitoire. Right now I mostly play the Kings Indian against d4 (which is a lot of fun, and has the bonus of having a variety of pawn structures to force me to think) and the occasional Benko, but plan to add d5 in the near future, and maybe the Nimzo at some point down the line. I play the dragon against e4 (which I love, but would recomend the accelerated dragon instead as it's less theoretically demanding) as well as the occasional schvechnikov, but am working on incorperating the Najorf and e5.
For context I started at 400ish blitz a few years ago and am 1800 now, though I feel I could have improved faster if I spent more time studying master games and learning theory (I know some people advise against it, but I truly think it helps your overall understanding and tactical awareness) and less time playing endless blitz games.
[deleted]
That it is....
Kinda just a dull opening, the epitome of beginners’ “push pawns in the middle and develop your minor pieces” mentality, nothing really happens, no cool traps or anything.
So as long as it bring in thr points...
Total turnoff
Is the meme saying the opening excites children?
I love it when people rated 1,000 or less play the London. If anyone else plays it, I will smite them with the power of 1000 stars.