What's wrong with the London?

[@cmalh]

Came for a new perspective on the London, left with a new perspective on life.

[@ChessCoachAndras]

:):):)

[@_Mahdisss]

Same bro same

[@peoplesdoctor]

whew, so true

[@Diachron]

An Andras specialty! 🧠

[@SharpTern]

I wish Andras would quit holding back and tell us how he really feels about the London.

[@reidflemingworldstoughestm1394]

idgaf how he feels about it, i only care what is wrong with it. More chess, less philosophy

[@cyrusthegreat1829]

My first time seeing this guy, he's so blunt, no sugar coating, real AF, also well spoken dude. wanna see more of his stuff. Lol

[@oldsuitman7762]

"that's a cold shower baby"

[@Grandcapi]

This channel is one of the best, if not the best, channels about chess. It is like having a coach at home.

[@ChessCoachAndras]

@@Grandcapi Thanks mate, appreciate the kind words!

[@ChessCoachAndras]

Hey mate. sorry for not responding sooner! Glad you like the content!

[@snowfail6748]

That’s the Hungarian way, bro

[@daves9492]

Good stuff! I actually find the London quite interesting to play against, because I know what the immediate drawback of the system is (not fighting for an advantage in the centre) and working out how to punish that in practice feels like quite a good test of how well I understand centah! If you fancied doing more Understanding Your Openings videos, I reckon some stuff on dealing with the most popular systems (London, Stonewall, KIA) and other lemony amateur openings (Scandi etc) would probably go down fairly well. A lot of people play these things and people want to know what to do against them, but there doesn't seem to be much information out there because a lot of instructional stuff is about, you know, proper openings...

[@alexandergoodwin1504]

I really like your idea for future opening videos, I hope this comment gets more upvotes so it is taken more seriously

[@michaels4255]

Yes, WHT does not pressure the center early, so BLK can play to equalize quickly with ...e5, or, with the center stable, he can delay castling and launch a kingside attack (since WHT castles early) after forcing an early exchange of knight for dark squared bishop. (Yes, WHT can open up the rook's file, but BLK can always opt to castle queenside if he forces the exchange before castling.)

[@stickershock66]

I was a Novice who was using systems to avoid hard work. You explained the beauty of chess better than anything I've ever read. Thank you.

[@ChessCoachAndras]

My pleasure and welcome onboard!

[@kurtozan251]

The London sucks. That's why I play the Bongcloud.

[@dc411en]

Good choice. Very few players prepare for the Bongcloud.

[@alancoe1002]

The Crab is fun, too. For Black or White. Look into the Drunken Master. Looks insane, but you can put people off their game. I've never played the Bongcloud.

[@lowtherlars]

At least you have to pay attention with the Bongcloud

[@highgroundchess]

As an Adult Improver, I jumped on the London train for a bit and I can say it only hurt my chess. It will stifle your chess growth and improvement. I can speak to this since it did deeply for me. I started improving a lot more when I left it behind. Everything stated in this video is great advice. I see the London or a variation of this by half the people in my club. Everyone has jumped on this. And after their book setup they really do not know how to progress. Thank you Andras for speaking the hard truths improvers need to hear.

[@petrambrus5963]

You are so right...But to be honest this is the second biggest problem for most "non professional players including me in every opening and in every game. After few moves, let say after approximately ten moves when you and your opponent play solid moves an your and opponent's position has no clear weaknesses or even one weakness and you"somehow succesfully develop pieces" it is really hard to come with good plan what to do next.First one is of course don't lose pawns or even pieces...

[@highgroundchess]

@@petrambrus5963 You are right. An argument could be made to all openings are like this. Where I might think this is true after diving into other openings I can see there is a difference. Mainly with contesting the center. London goes a little bit against opening principles where you forgo fighting for central control a bit. But either way players have to find their style and what works for them. The London is popular and becoming a main opening which could end up as theory for main openings at some point since GMs are now playing it.

[@cheesiechess3656]

I hope this video reaches out to people since there's a lot of misinformation out there!

[@rjjhh443]

Yes i agree.. I get soo frustrated playing the london.. Why no tactics in this opening? U can spend 30 mins on a position and u cant find anything.. But i think this opening works when u r in out of form or scared of a higher rated opponent..

[@gregwhittier5206]

I'm a 50+ year old chess noob whose only relevant experience is coaching youth basketball. I was getting tired or replying to every random gambit after 1. e4 and tried the London and win rate was at 71% at my lowly ELO, but stopped. Why? I realized it's zone defense! Every youth basketball league doesn't let little kids play zone because they don't develop their skill. They make them play man-to-man (and also don't allow full court pressure, which I guess is analogous to gambits) so they learn basically skill of dribbling and shooting and the 2-man and 3-man game. I hated it after they allowed it (at too early an age in my opinion) because most coaches focused on winning rec league youth games and all played zone and pressed and the games. The kids got little out of it and the games were horrible to watch. Horrible to watch was also why zone used to be banned in the NBA. It's not banned now but still not used much because the players are too good (having grown up in a system where the zone was banned in their formative years!).

[@felix.gulsrud6271]

I found channel today, Andras. I found it via an homepage that recommends the London for improving patzers like me. Well I never followed that particular advice, because in my humble opinion, the King's gambit is more fun than the London. That's why I am a 1.e4 player. I like high risk chess. I have to be myself, after all. You put words on my gut feeling about systems. I never do anything in chess and life that I do not understand. I do not like appeal to authority. Moreover, systems seem to be playing on autopilot. Against the London, I am not yet sure what to do however. If memory serves, Simon Williams claims the you will never be good if you play too many openings. The 1.e4 player is forced to play many. That's a curse and a blessing. Good to hear a master saying that variety is good not only for fun but for learning as well.

[@SpaceCadet4Jesus]

I play the Spanish Inquisition. NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition! Amongst my weaponry are such diverse elements as: fear, surprise, ruthless efficiency, an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope, and nice red uniforms.

[@klacsanzky77]

I totally agree with Andras, I played the London system for many years, and I can say it is boring to play all the time as it leads some dry style of playing. I now play dynamically with English, Vienna game, Catalan, and other things as white. Even if I lose with a new opening, I still enjoy more. If you are going to play a London system, at least push C4 instead of C3, or push back at the center in other ways, or try the Jobava London style, mix it up a lot. Try to take to advantage of any defensive play from black, so 2.C4 is a better response against say something like 1..a6

[@michaelvanzyl9418]

In response to 3:54, a good pickup line could fit the mold.

[@ChessCoachAndras]

Thanks, good one!

[@Tobi-pn2xs]

Any examples?

[@javieracevedo7970]

Coach, your candor energized me! I’m off to play the Spanish!

[@gmpillo604]

Great content coach! Thanks for your sincerity and no BS approach for chess improvement

[@joeperry1188]

When I was lower rated, playing exclusively blitz games, I would play the London because it meant that I could smash out the opening quickly and try to avoid time trouble. I really quickly transitioned into a Bf4 queen's gambit as standard because I found it hard to generate offense from the London proper. Now I play Bg5 in the queen's gambit typically because I am higher rated and I better understand the value of pressuring the knight on f6 to control the centre. If you'd asked me "why is your bishop on f4?" I'd have told you that I just put it there because it looks alright on an open diagonal. Contrast that with "why is your bishop on g5?" The answer is that if I take or pin the knight on f6, it reduces his influence over E4 and D5, and if I ever want to establish two central pawns, it's going to be hard with E4 covered by his knight and his D pawn (and often his bishop) Since then I've stopped playing blitz almost altogether, and I naturally gravitated to E4 openings. I'm going to pick blitz back up again using it as a tool to expose myself to more opening variations - as recommended by Andras. Because that's probably a really quick way to help embed the different variations of, for eg. Ruy Lopez, so I'll be able to expose myself to more good and bad opening moves by playing more games in that position. On this last point, I won't play the London in blitz anymore because IT DOESN'T REALLY REQUIRE YOU TO LEARN OPENING VARIATIONS. Or, if it does. You're only going to learn them after move 10 or so, because you could probably play the first 10 moves without looking at your opponent's moves. Well done to anyone who read this entire rant.

[@joeperry1188]

@mxstoe Completely agree - I was more trying to make the point that the more I gravitated away from simple systems like the London, the deeper my understanding about the position became. Obviously I have a lot to learn! I am very far away from understanding all opening ideas in the QGD - but the less I played the London, the better I understood what I was doing

[@vivalakid]

Thank you for sharing 🙏🏿

[@averageplayer1995]

I have never played the London once in thousands online games. I despise the opening. Still i spent too much time playing chess to reach 2100 online rating and i didn't get anything worthwhile out of it. If someone doesn't have too much time for chess the London opening is a concrete option. You won't become good at chess but you will be able to play some casual games without self destruction in the opening.

[@aleisterjames]

Thanks for this video. I've never played the London, despite it being so popular, as there was something that didn't appeal to me about it. You managed to articulate it perfectly (and more, of course). I'm finally diving in to trying to learn some opening theory after years of just tying to apply the basic principals, and this video has helped answer a few questions. Love your work. AjC

[@petrambrus5963]

I have the same experience like you man. I start to learn some openings and more theory just now, because otherwise I will get killed quickly nowadays. Almost everyone play openings better in these days than five or ten years ago. But I never had this bad habit to learn London.

[@ricardopintodarocha]

Boy i love the way you talk, also good point, nice content! Cheers

[@wesleywarren3246]

Did anybody else get an ad of Eric Rosen selling his London course on this video?

[@SpaceCadet4Jesus]

I watched this video twice and the main points I got were, Don't play only one opening mindlessly, Fight for the center, Play aggressively up to your ability to do so, Learn openings that have greater potential for tactical variations. In this video, I was hoping you were showing the London's inherent exploitable weaknesses from a black perspective. Maybe that will be a future video?

[@darrylkassle361]

Reading between the lines I think its best to select strong openings for white and black that cover the most structures possible then you get a broader understanding and build better pattern recognition which is what chess is at its core the recognition of patterns .

[@ClemensAdolphs]

I mean if we go by "But Hikaru and Carlsen play it" then I guess by now the Bongcloud is legit too.

[@JPCPSeto]

Totally agree with your points Andras! Glad I (recently) found your channel. I've been building my opening repertoire based on a couple of my favourite players, all my games are some kind of QGD, English or Réti. On rare occasions, but only as a surprise weapon, I can play the Torre Attack, which luckily is at least more combative than the London (especially with an early N.e5).

[@ChessCoachAndras]

Glad you found me, enjoy the channel! Also I recommend you check out my d4 CHessable course, which would cover your repertoire completely as White!

[@JPCPSeto]

@@ChessCoachAndras Thanks Andras

[@danielemessina1979]

I understand the spirit of this but considering only the worst possible case of London system games and players is a bit of a straw man argument. For example the fact you can play the same moves without reacting to what black does is just not true. Also if you study only one opening you are disregarding all the other ones no matter which one you pick, so it's not a London-specific issue.

[@doddydad2]

You could argue that the london means you don't see other lines through transposition, but the london is most recommended to beginners, who aren't going to see any theory at all no matter what they play.

[@michaels4255]

My thinking is that a player can always diversify his repertoire later (and of course he should diversify it at some point since the London does not really challenge BLK enough IF you are starting to face more competent players). I think is an advantage if a less experienced player can spend most of his time improving his endgame and middlegame play. That will take him far, and then he can learn more aggressive openings as he begins to face better players. I mean, let's face it, at lower levels of play, it hardly matters what opening you play since most games are decided by blunders. The biggest mistakes beginners make is spending too much time learning complicated openings. The opening is the most complex part of the game yet most new players are struggling with it from the beginning. I don't see why it would not be great if they can postpone that part of their development until later. More advanced players often seek an edge in the opening, but for weaker players it only needs to be a means of getting to a playable middle game.

[@anoukadel6397]

Hear hear

[@gnarfle]

I agree, I started playing london and as I've climbed from 100 to 1100 I still start with it, but as my knowledge and experience has grown I now deviate from it more often than not due to what my opponent does. I think it served me well early on and it's only boring if you completely blindly play the same moves every time. But I think (hope?) most people are like me and as they learn more, get better at tactics and start playing stronger opponents, start to see how to deviate from the basic setup based on what your opponent does. I'll grab the center if my opponent lets me, I'll push c4 when appropriate, I'll Bb5 pin, etc. I suppose that means I no longer play the london, but at least for me this felt like a very natural evolution and starting with the London in no way locked me into a rigid opening without learning anything.

[@andrewglass7208]

Very good video. The point is that you need to think and understand each move, not just blindly play. Add the Colle to this discussion as well. It’s made chess quite boring too. Carlsen plays e4, d4, and c4 openings. He’s even played the Bird’s (1.f4) opening which borders on dubious. Carlsen once played the Trompowsky in the world championship. He’s looking for a middle game and endgame where he can get an advantage against other super grandmasters. You can’t compare to our games.

[@ilyaibrahimovic9842]

He has played f3 Kf2 vs So in blitz and regularly pulls out the Norwegian Rat against non-masters. Most amusing was the hand-and-brain game with Gustafsson (if I spelled his name right) in which he threw his rook stupidly, like, literally stupidly, on about move 7, into his opponent's castled position on g2. Half a game later he said, "this is so incredibly lost," and as the final seconds were ticking down, that he had shown absolutely no respect for his opponent and that a loss would be just punishment. The amateur dropped his flag about 2-3 moves from the mate. Point is, Carlsen does everything. If he pulls something out occasionally, that is no indication that it is to be recommended.

[@bradleyreese5156]

As always! Pure genius! The chess universe is huge, let's not play a system that only let's us see 1 percent of the sky.

[@happyhornet1000]

Let people play what they want. Kasparov and Carlsen have both played it. Enough said. Not everyone has hundreds of hours to learn 30 moves of theory in the Ruy Lopez etc.

[@KeepChessSimple]

@@happyhornet1000 you clearly haven't watched the video. Kasparov and Carlsen never used it as their main weapon. Only play it once in a while. The biggest point is that if you want to improve it is better to have more variation and ambitious openings that actually fight for the center. This doesn't mean you will have to memorize 30 moves of theory.

[@trlspann]

Great video. I’m looking to get better under a multitude of structures, so this resonates well.

[@shorbock]

that reasoning is interesting not only for the london, but for "universal systems" of opening (colle zutertort, king's indian attack, hippopotamus etc)

[@baboon820]

Did anyone watch Simon Williams videos about London, saying that it can be a really aggressive opening? Now, I am not sure if I wanna continue playing it or not..

[@joeldick6871]

London is basically playing the QGD from black, but with the queen's bishop freed. Granted, it cedes the advantage of playing white, but it's no worse than playing as black. Most games at that level, the advantage of playing white doesn't mean as much as playing a solid game. But the main point of the video isn't about whether the opening is solid. The point it that it teaches bad habits and avoids expanding your chess skill, and that is a very valid criticism.

[@npmerrill]

5:58 “…a ginurrrrrmous system we call chess.” Love this.

[@briancourtice2858]

Maybe I do want to learn to utilize 30 different pawn structures. Maybe I do want memorize theoretical lines, 15 moves deep, for all of a dozen different openings. Maybe I do want to absorb hundreds of lessons, and spend countless hours practicing, so that one day maybe I will be capable of playing chess, and not a system. In the meantime, something I can learn quickly and use effectively against other players like myself who are just starting out sounds pretty good.

[@unknownalsounknown4238]

catalan system.....

[@Danumurti18]

London for white, Caro Kan for black, easy system, you just have to know some traps your opponent might play. The reason you want yo play other system is because you want to enjoy watching games played in other system.

[@zxien1]

I remember doing an experiment half a year ago against 2000-2100's on lichess where I would push 4 pawns up 1 square against a london player for the first 4 moves. Against 5 different players none of them knew how to play in the center and HALF of them didn't even understand the concept of pawn breaks. Easiest way to beat a lower rated london player---> just fart around until you're in a position you know they have never seen before. Works every time.

[@lp4969]

@@BeFourCM hedgehog is great to annoy london players

[@lp4969]

@@BeFourCM love it! Thanks for the info👍

[@phukyu9016]

Surprised you were able to keep this vid under 10 hours 👍

[@joshr7457]

Great explanation, makes much more sense to play the board and not a series of prescribed moves. I'll put this opening to rest and focus on more thoughtful and less passive openings. Appreciate your thoughts!

[@agenttalex]

Came from Danya, keep up the great work!

[@ChessCoachAndras]

Thanks mate!

[@trent797]

Did Danya mention this somewhere? I found this video from Reddit.

[@ChessCoachAndras]

@@trent797 NO, Danya Raided my stream and then I released the vid whilst the stream was on.

[@mwgood523]

There's nothing wrong with the London. London system bashing is just a waste of time in my view. The avoidance of understanding chess is the problem. Plenty of people who understand chess at a high level employ the London from time to time. The problems Andras points out shouldn't be confused with playing the London at all. He's just against monotony, oversimplification of chess, and avoidance of learning due to laziness. None of that needs to be associated with the London and it's overly simplistic to do so. There. That's why I completely disagree with the primary message of this video. Bashing the London is just as much of a "fad" as adopting the opening as one's primary opening. Neither side is thinking constructively. Of course, Andras is right about learning chess properly and about those who play the London because they don't want to learn anything else, but just bashing the London is like saying such unqualified nonsense as "playing Blitz is bad for you." It IS bad for you... but only at a certain level and if it causes you to learn bad habits. The London *can* be bad for you too, but it needn't be, if you approach it properly. For god's sake, Eric Rosen and other high rated players use it regularly and even Magnus has used it from time to time. Of course, Rosen doesn't play it as a static "system." Naroditsky regularly employs the Jobava London... but, the word "London" certainly doesn't scare them away. Liam Quan Li has an excellent Chessable course on how to play the London at a high level. On a personal note, I'm primarily an e4 player, so I'm not defending "my opening," although I did play it for some time. I love the bishop's opening, Italian, Ruy, Vienna, Scotch, Morra, Grand Prix, to the open sicilians, etc., but I play d4 and the London from time to time. Heck, I sometimes play the Colle or even a Stone Wall with some success and these may even be simpler than the London in some versions. It's about understanding and adaptation to your opponent's moves. If your opponent doesn't adapt properly vs the Colle, Stone Wall, or the London, they can be extremely venomous!

[@gromov-]

Hi Andras, I liked the video and as someone who started out with the London precisely as a way to cut down complexity and start playing games (I tend to get bogged down in preparation with strategy games and then actually play too few proper matches), but later migrated to e4 stuff, I'd have liked to see a bit more specifics in the video. I migrated away from the london because I never intended to only play 1 thing but I never understood it as weak/passive (but I'm a noob so that's normal). I'd have loved to see in this video more examples of the pitfalls of the London in the midgame, say how things go wrong when you have passive presence in the center, becasue as you said in the video at first glance it looks like the Londoner is going for the center, but in the wrong way, but in my inexperienced eyes they both look very similar so I can't tell immediately one way is worse. Could you maybe showcase some model games like you did on the other series for different ratings, like players doing the London at least moderately competently and then failing at some point because of the passivity of the opening (rather than just blundering a piece or something like that). I think that companion vid would really help cement this video with some concepts in action. Thanks again for the great content, keep it up.

[@ilusoriob]

Great idea.

[@WeCube1898]

London System is a very good way to introduce someone to have a playable chess, but its biggest strength is also its biggest drawback; its popular with every body. But as a beginner its pretty solid experience in building middlegame tactics and basic concepts. Its boring for some but it is super solid to those who understand it deeply, its pretty annoying to combat it if the one using it knows the concepts fully, it is pretty hard to break.

[@DavidBrack-c9v]

Fantastic encouragement for an ambitious and depth-seeking mindset. Thank you.

[@ChessCoachAndras]

The pleassure is is mine!

[@vishnuvijay6327]

hmmm... Will start working on a response ;)

[@ChessCoachAndras]

No need for one pal! we can have different opinions and still appreciate each other! YOu are a talented dude, I wish you the very best!

[@vishnuvijay6327]

@@ChessCoachAndras ty! this comment was just a joke btw :) liked the vid, i encourage others to do the same!

[@trondeg74]

After coming back to chess after a couple of decades, I've enjoyed the London. Sure, I've put some work into different variations - including a lot of Jobava variations - but it serves me well. This allows me to spend time on my black repertoire - Dutch and Caro-Kann. When I feel my choices there are solid enough, I'll add e4 back... Wesley So's lifetime repertoires are waiting. Using what little I remember of the Najdorf and Gründfeld 30 years afterwards would just be begging for pain.

[@Shellback13202]

Would you consider the english solid? I like the positional play and feel like it fights for the center well.

[@ChessCoachAndras]

Yup

[@nonavailable4000]

Very well explained , this system is not my style , but looking back to how many wild games i lost !!! , i could almost sympathize 😆with people sticking only to the London system !! in their games

[@anirudh1976]

Nice video! Gotta go and change my opening repertoire from the london to something else :) . Any suggestions @ChessCoach Andras?

[@jamestjw97]

the 'cambridge springs' structure was mentioned, was that a mistake or am I just mistaken? Should that have been the Carlsbad structure instead?

[@ChessCoachAndras]

I am mistaken, you are not:)

[@rauljosegarcia]

I'm just starting out and saw your other video on choosing opening lines (the amateur's mind) and didn't fully grasp your thoughts on the London, but it sure is clear on this video. Not playing the London is like eating your vegetables. I was about to launch myself headfirst into the London, but if I'm being honest with myself I want to improve long term, and I do enjoy variety. Thank you for keeping it real. #adultimprover #beginner #oldguy

[@b1rds_arent_real]

Would playing the London (especially with early h4-h5) against the Dutch be an exception? It's a rare opening and having a solid line + clear idea prepared sounds more attractive to me, than digging deep into the early e4 lines. What's your take on that approach?

[@ChessCoachAndras]

Yea, I guess against a Dutch is sensible to keep, although even there you could find better alternatives.

[@b1rds_arent_real]

@@ChessCoachAndras Thanks for the advice, I'll replace it with something more interesting on a rainy day.

[@h1a8]

The title should be "Whats wrong with playing the London all the time?" I play the London occasionally (still play other openings) and i dont get bored when i play it. I especially play it against a tactically minded and tactically superior player. Also the London is great for those who have very little time to study or even play the game. It is still would remain enjoyable for that reason.

[@SerLaama]

Did you watch the video? If you did, why are you acting like this wasn't adressed?

[@dbisth]

Hi Andras have you made any video on punishing the opening mistakes? I am sure many of us would love to see that.

[@exquisitecorpse4917]

I've been working on the London....as black! It's become so common online that I wanted to put some energy into finding real weapons against it. You can play for basic equality, and the game will be fine, but you can also get some fantastic positions by going for the center with 3...c5. If they play their moves robotically, black gets a better center for free. If they take, black will have safe pressure and a lead in development. One of the big arguments for playing the London is that it avoids prep.....au contrare mon frere.

[@keedt]

indeed, it's so common in online chess that every semi-serious player has a good line against it _and_ gets to practice it regularly.

[@exquisitecorpse4917]

@@keedt And this again begs the question: If someone is going to prep against you anyway, why take this dull, useless position? You could play 1.c4 2.g3, remain too cool for the main lines, and still get a neat set of positions with white. While we're at it, the stonewall attack and KIA are two others I see beginners learning, and they're both terrible first openings. The stonewall is trash when you get to 1500, so it's just a glass ceiling...and, per Andras, you get the same structure in every game. The KIA has the opposite problem: It's great at an intermediate level, but we can't teach beginners to give away the center and swing for the fences; that's animal abuse!

[@Omar-kw5ui]

I completely agree with you. I started chess not that long ago. I played the London and got stuck at 600-700 elo. Once I decided to stop playing this opening, within 3 months I became 1100 rating. When I played the London I had no idea what I was doing. I learned the concepts you mention when I started playing things like the Scandinavian and Queen's gambit. The London is a terrible thing for a beginner.

[@ChessJourneyman]

As a London player, I strongly believe in the famous saying by the late great Lee Jun Fan: "I fear not the man who has practiced 10,000 kicks once, but I fear the man who has practiced one kick 10,000 times."

[@WeCube1898]

London System is a very good way to introduce someone to have a playable chess, but its biggest strength is also its biggest drawback; its popular with every body. But as a beginner its pretty solid experience in building middlegame tactics and basic concepts. Its boring for some but it is super solid to those who understand it deeply, its pretty annoying to combat it if the one using it knows the concepts fully, it is pretty hard to break.

[@reesthomas8467]

So do you know 300 computer lines in the London and at least 20 grandmaster games by heart? Or are you just lazy and play the same BS over and over in blitz

[@crazyboysince1998]

Yeah but playing the london is as painful as kicking a tree 10000 times and by the end all the wisdom means nothing cause your leg is broken

[@darrylkassle361]

Yeah and then you find that one type of kick does not work with that opponent so you wish you had learnt how to do the other 9,999 other kicks even if only once so you could at least have a chance of effecting something. In other words learnt the many different ways you could kick so at least you understand combat a bit more thoroughly

[@darrylkassle361]

Yeah good one. People who are taken by clever sayings always need to be refuted with just as clever sayings

[@ghetzdelaghetto6690]

I only play London. It's Epic and fun.

[@ChessCoachAndras]

I am happy for you!

[@rpd350]

Excellent! I thoroughly agree with you & you described it in such a good way. Against 1.d4 recently, I have started playing, 1.d4 g6 more & guess what? White regularly trots out the London!? Then the things you describe come to pass (White does not fight for the centre & plays passively). I win most of those games, so I say, alleluia for the London! Let all our opponents play it that badly & lose! Luckily we do not play Magnus or Hikaru playing it against us, so we will all be more than fine playing against it playing the majority who have learnt it from a 10 minute utube course on it! ;-)

[@ArcG3]

Amazing video, great explanation Andras

[@1977ajax]

I have to agree! Anything that you acquire with little or no effort turns out to be of little or no value in the long run. Applies everywhere.

[@bongclown9302]

there are many passive opening systems that are playable, but not good for growth.

[@framebadger]

Looking forward to your next video on why everyone should play the Colle system. Or maybe the Botvinnik English...

[@djosephsss]

This is very similar to what I tell my students when I am making them write code instead of use a stupid tool! If you want to actually learn something well, you have to work it out yourself and learn to deal with all the bumps and hiccups

[@greatsuperbigboss]

The London is a very good and interesting opening for white. Hikaru Nakamura, one of the best chess players of the world, and Levy Rozman (gotham chess), recommend it as one of the best openings for beginners, intermediate players and grandmasters (youtube: opening tier list for beginners, intermediate players, gms). It is also the favourite opening of IM Eric Rosen. You can find a high quality content of videos on youtube, where he shows many of the tricky lines of London (Rosen teaches Botez for instance). You can and should play this opening highly versatile. (It is completely clear that you should also play other openings to understand different kinds of positions. No player ever will only play one opening in his life.) In the playlist of Hanging pawns, who puts much effort into his videos, to London he shows many ways how to play it against different setups. Another fan of this opening is NM Robert Ramirez (chess lesson 58, 62 - best opening for white). Stockfish also likes the opening - you have a good position and are positive in all lines. London is versatile, has many attacking opportunities and should be studied by every chess player. A great help are the videos I mentioned above.

[@ChessCoachAndras]

Sure....

[@chess.shyman]

Totally agree, I hate why this channel declines London as a good openning if you spend time learning more about London :)

[@microitos9754]

@@chess.shyman Because it _isn’t_ a good opening. If you think you get better at chess by learning cheap tricks and simple strategies to stay alive, not to mention always be on the backfoot right off the opening then thats a nono. Also, the biggest problem isn’t even that, it’s that you ALWAYS play the same structures, so you aren’t learning proper chess. The symmetrical and Carlsbad pawn structures are the only thing you are gonna learn, and even there your pieces are poorly placed for the structure. Learn proper openings that give you a fighting chance and most importantly a variety of structures. Of course, if you don’t want to improve in chess then system openings are fine, but if you want serious improvement, forget about them.

[@bruhifysbackup]

​@@microitos9754 First of all, this guy doesn't know what he's talking about. he has to check his sources, (which he doesn't have because he's hungry for videos and monetization). The second thing, there is something called 'playing with black' in chess. This guy wants you to spend 97423749872349823749832749823749823749832730947239087423980472390749823749820367459286492364936472364782 years learning all the 1947092137459832465923758029542372567896075667439075094375 variations of the open Sicilian. You're just gonna repeat what he said? 'OOOH NO STRUCTURE NO OPEN POSITION NONONONO'. There are some more structures I can name. The double 'b' pawn structure in Bf5 positons.(1.d4 d5 Nf3 Nf6 Bf4 Bf5 The double 'd' pawn structure in the bf5/chigorin positions. The berkes(h) structure in the mainline London. The c3-d4-e4/Nc3-e4 structure in the KID.(Technically it's still the london) The Stonewall Structure. The Chigorin structures. THE LITERAL MAIN LINE OF THE LONDON IS A DOUBLE C PAWN AND ISOLATED A PAWN SAC? WTF THIS IS UTTER Stupidity this idiot is talking about. And the ​​beauty of the London is that it's good against everything. I don't ever know why you call that a bad thing. It like 5 problems 1 solution, but here the problems are KID, QID, Tarrasch ,benoni , Ba6 lines, etc etc. All of these have different way of playing. oh wait. I already forgot to mention other lines like e4 in the Steinitz counter gambit. 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bf4 d5 3.e3 c5 4.Nd2 Nc6 5.Ngf3 Qb6 6.dxc5 Qxb2. These positions offer a general initiative if black doesn't know what he's doing and if he does then these positions are generally equal. In reference to 3:54, the answer is a google search. You learn to do it in 5 mins, serves the rest of your life, allows you to discover some amazing stuff, whether behind a paywall or not. but it also allows you to find some braindead guy ranting 20 mins about a perfectly fine opening for improvers and encouraging them to waste time studying theory they will never use anyway. for example: 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Be3 e5 7. Nb3 Be6 8. f3 Be7 9. Qd2 O-O 10. O-O-O Nbd7 11. g4 b5 12. g5 b4 13. Ne2 Ne8 14. f4 a5 15. f5 a4 16. Nbd4 exd4 17. Nxd4 b3 18. Kb1 bxc2+ 19. Nxc2 Bb3 20. axb3 axb3 21. Na3 So what you're saying basically is that 'Im greedy and don't do any research for my videos' in like a 20 minute long video. All im saying is this guy is greedy, doesn't want to research, wants to people to lose, and etc etc.

[@jakecherry5770]

Wonderful video explaining why the London isn't mainstream. I have recently been playing the Kings Indian Defense as Black against D4. I like the themes in it with striking back in the center to prepare for a kingside attack or possibly queenside expansion, but now wonder is it detrimental to play it? The intent of the KID doesn't seem to be as passive as it is in the London, but it being a sort of system I could see it being flawed. I know there are subtitles depending on move order like if they play early e5 but overall but are there other fundamental differences besides the passive nature?

[@sowyerford8874]

I disagree with that, you Can also play it in a completly different way for example with Long(or no) castles and atack with g4, h4 or Stoff like that, there are many atacking and instructive Games in the London, if you don‘t play it that boring like in the Video

[@vinigm]

I love the fact that you were almost laughing saying mortal humans compare themselves to hikaru or carlsen 🤣

[@69fabin]

Amazing video. A true service. Awesome to have all those arguments we know but this time from someone who knows much better what hes talking about! Thanks Andras!

[@grantc.7838]

I've waited a long time for this

[@ahahaha3505]

1... Nf6 players frustrated by facing the London should look into the Old Indian defense. It looks to force dxe5 and basically convert a d-pawn game into an e-pawn game. In my experience, London players respond very poorly when knocked out of their comfort zone in this way.

[@ChessCoachAndras]

I don't understand what you are suggesting. London Players will play 1d4 d6 2.Nf3 and transpose back into London.

[@ahahaha3505]

@@ChessCoachAndras Often they bring out the Bishop first, so 1. d4 Nf6 2. Bf4 d6. But 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 d6 is perfectly playable and London merchants will usually plough ahead with 3. ... Bf4 anyway. 1. d4 Nf6 2. Bf4 d6, 3. Nf3 Nbd7 4. e3 c6 5. e3 Qc7 with 6...e5. It melts their brains! Edit:fixed the mangled variation to add in 3... Nbd7

[@ChessCoachAndras]

@@ahahaha3505 I don't know what level of players you are talking about, but this is a rather poor setup, and as long as they don't trade on e5 (why would they?)White is doing better than in the majority of the London lines. Btw this e5 plan is super easy to carry out with the g6 Bg7 lines, which is far better!:)

[@rodolfojimenez5503]

What's wrong with the London?, i thought that question was rethorical.

[@malacor17]

I can tell this is going to be a spicy video. As someone who is always on the Black side of the London I welcome it. Much easier game than playing against the mainlines and since its so common I'm more booked up than if they actually met my Semi Slav with theory.

[@KnightToRemember]

I can relate to this so much as a Semi-Slav player, every time I face the London I’m like: “thank you for the easy game and I guess I’m going to take the center if you don’t mind”, I actually know a lot more theory of the London for black rather than the actual semi-slav theory

[@yourmedschoolinterview]

I’ve been playing the London for a while, but you’ve convinced me! I’ll start looking for something fresh

[@ChessCoachAndras]

Glad to hear sir. Just kick off with d4 then c4 and enjoy yourself!

[@bigvern2003]

So enjoying these videos. Can't believe you're still so niche

[@RowRowFightThePowaa]

Pawn triangle go brrrr

[@B4ck]

Which are, in your opinion, the best openings for a beginner player? The first two to learn? Thanks

[@ChessCoachAndras]

you need to watch this: kzbin.info/www/bejne/gp2zeYmCm6t7aas

[@leonardorinversi9164]

Yeah obviously I agree. But a lot of chess players plays the Berlin which is more boring than London.

[@DJWolford]

god i wonder what gotham chess would think

[@TheJJO]

Nice video! Now let's talk about the Stonewall attack

[@quantrilion]

Awesome video as always Andras! Can you do a video discussing why you also think that playing the closed Sicilian is not good for improvement? I recall you saying that improving players should only play the Open Sicilian

[@sameerkanth3804]

I lowkey used London system to climb to 2000, I would agree its boring to get the same setup again and again, but it isn't a passive setup at all!! It is a system with which I learnt how to attack and play aggressively towards the kingside with concepts like using f g h pawns, fishing pole trap, Greek gift sacrifice, sacrifices on h7 and f7 with the knight. Getting comfortable with queen side castling. [Disclaimer: I played Italian, Bishop's Opening, Vienna and other e4 openings to get to 1600 and then switched to London to learn aggressive chess] ... I learnt London mainly because we get to "develop" all our pieces quickly without disturbance and then launch kingside attacks. ... However, I would also like to share that indeed it teaches bad habits, for instance I also learnt that it is fine not to castle. [mainly because a rook is required on H-file for the attack to work, but in most of my games I used to skip castling queen side as well]. I am not an IM like Andras so I would indeed suggest to learn normal chess as well just like how he recommends. The attacking ideas that I learnt in London can also be implemented in the Queen's gambit. Except that in London we compromise queen side play a little bit, but in the queen's gambit we focus on all parts of the board which I believe is more important. Also, when Magnus plays the London he doesn't go berserk on kingside immediately he ensures that his queen side is safe and only then he utilizes the ready-made attack setup on the kingside.

[@diosn6909]

Given what you said, people shouldnt be playing the French Defence either.

[@ChessCoachAndras]

Spot on! I advise very strongly against the French for beginners and club players. (Not above that level though, just to be clear)

[@diosn6909]

@@ChessCoachAndras so someone above club level (above 1500 elo FIDE I suppose) might be ok to play the London?

[@lockstock600]

Great video, though I do know a Serbian doctor who smokes about 5 cigars a day haha.

[@ChessCoachAndras]

Easily one of the best comment !!👌❤️😂

[@InfiniteQuest86]

Funny part is that this drives home the point even more. Just because someone does it, doesn't mean you should.

[@WalaStika]

This video changed my (chess) life. Holy shit.

[@ChessCoachAndras]

Glad to hear!

[@michaels4255]

@www.youtube.com/@ChessCoachAndras FYI, the final e in epitome is not silent even in English.

[@gusserflys]

wonderful debate.. basically this is what i do, whatever Coach Andras says/teaches... i do... :)

[@andrb8945]

And now we have seen the london in a world championship match LOL

[@DomDeDom]

I'm new to chess strategy. I found the London helped my scores. "You're a gatekeeper and an elitest" is for fools 🤣 Accordingly, will take your advice

[@sergejdraskovic1962]

Very nice! What do you think about antisicilians like alapin, gran prix etc.?

[@ChessCoachAndras]

That they avoid the most fun opening. Its like: here is a 7 course meal sire and you go like, "nahh , thanks, Maccas burgers are better."

[@sergejdraskovic1962]

@@ChessCoachAndras Thank you for your reply! Do you have the same opinion on 3. Bb5 Sicilians ( Rossolimo and Moscow) ?

[@nickburggraaf3977]

I know you like a sport anology. In rock climbing there is a way of holding a grip called a closed crimb (say the London grip). The reasons why it's so populair is because you can use it for almost any hold and you're climbing level goes up quickly in the beginning. And the main reason is that it's comfortable. It's your grip (aka your London opening) you know best and to let it go means you have to try and fail with other more difficult grips and dropping your climbing level along with it. Eventually you have to unlearn this habit in order to grow in overall skill.

[@norman-gregory]

Greetings...Hi Chico - I use to play this all the time, a few years ago, when I was learning. I did not understand close or open games then... ( I have been away from Chess for app 6 years/playing again at present time). My rating is a 950/1000...so please accept my limited knowledge. I do like playing a more open game, and most certainly want to learn "Correct" Chess. Not being limited to...the above Opening (I do not play this now...I find it not enjoyable). Thanks Chico's/Coach/Andras.

[@ChessCoachAndras]

Thanks and welcome on board!

[@konstantinosmarkidis8145]

Perfect , 100% you right !

[@henrikbechstrm1650]

Very nice video with good points. But I wonder what you think about the Rossolimo/Moscow variations on the Sicilian, from White´s perspectives? Are these good to play for the improving player, or do you say, «Play the Open Sicilian, dude!» ?

[@lockstock600]

Andras advocates for Open Sicilian or Alapin Variation.

[@ChessCoachAndras]

YOu answered it for me!

[@prestongarvey6175]

this video is making me want to play the London

[@szilardballa3513]

His accent sounds like a belter from the expanse.

[@glarris1]

😅yes!

[@tank.4496]

"Cuntinue" lol

[@rosv3774]

London system is a perfect opening base, what do you mean not real chess? Its modern and havent had time to develop into a classic. If it was called the morphy system i bet this discussion would be different. Heres my suggestion: if you want to be good at math, start by learning 1+1. "Its not real math". Well yes it is, even when you master quantum. EVERY opening can transition into other openings. For instance. Get used to the london, then go c4 instade of c3 (for exemple when the opponent responds to bishop to c4 with bishop to f5). Put the knight on c3. Viola, you have started a perfect transition (with middlegame and pawn structure experience) into queens gambit accepted/declined. Also easy transition to slav as black. Then you experiment with playing the london with bishop on c1, viola french defense. Ive also seen you bash the scandinavian defense. Same there. Similar "simple" structures appears almost EVERY time. Then when you get tired of it you realize you have saved tons of time studying theory about the karo cann. Cause there are so many similarities and themes between middlegame pawnstructures (which is basically everything sound understanding of what opening theory is?) Life changing advise in 5 minutes? Creativity =simplifying. On another note, your videos are usually very good. Ive learned alot from them. Thank you sir ;) You are a provacative teacher, those are usually the best. Thanks. All the best.

[@ChessCoachAndras]

You sound like a very intelligent person so I am rather confused as to why you chose to not to understand the main point of this video, which was not to bash the London but explain why it is an opening that endorses really bad habits. Your maths analogy is fully wrong for this reason too, because the simplicity is not what is wrong with The London. It is the mindset behind it. (which is that it is trying to tell you that 1+1 is all there is in chess). All this said, I appreciate your comment.

[@ChessJourneyman]

@@ChessCoachAndras And you are clearly not a very intelligent person because he understood your video and gave very good points why your hatred is completely wrong and unfounded. London is not some parrot regurgitating sounds it hears, every move matters and you will lose quickly if you don't respect it. Some bully beatdown is in order here, Rosen vs Bozen the Clown, making an example of a fool throwing rocks at openings he doesn't understand. Would be hilarious watching a live stream of attempts to justify why London is basic and harmful for chess players whilst getting butchered by Jobava. Magnus Carlsen is an example of an actually intelligent person who truly loves chess and respects every opening enough to learn it and truly understand it - and surprise, surprise, he's had crushing victories with London. On the plus side, it's a real-time saver showing your hand pre-flop, so people looking to learn chess can easily identify what you can or can't offer.

[@ChessCoachAndras]

@@ChessJourneyman Of course I am famously unintelligent, but someone who judges me at something I have been doing for 20 years is clearly a mastermind. Bringing up Carlsen in this shows how little you and the other critiques of the video (or rather the critiques of my persona) bothered to actually grasp what I am saying (Watch again and try to comprehend,). On that note Carlsen wins games and produces masterpieces with literally any opening.. A MasterChef making an amazing omelette would apparently convince you that that dish is the the crown of fine dining. Also, You have made up your mind way before you watched any of my videos, otherwise you would not say purely insulting things like what "I can and can't offer pre flop." (According to thousands I can offer a lot by the way) Oh , final note, I did beat Rosen, on stream, in the London, (you can find it if you care to look instead of just offloading your anger) but it does not prove anything to anyone who actually thinks. The same way how it would not have meant anything if he had won. Because this video was about improving players. But , of course, as stated above, you chose to hate instead of paying attention to the details of the message of this video.

[@JakeLemasterGuitar]

I grew more in a weekend of studying the nimzo than a year and change of playing the London to be honest. Even switching to the Jobava made me a much better player

[@hideomituns2184]

thank you for making this video. Amazing.

[@mckenziearchibald4510]

Lovely video. Also why is it in the love thy classics playlist?

[@fastr1337]

Jeez chessmaster Andras... how many "HEAD" shirts do you own? didnt know they sponcer chess players :p

[@ChessCoachAndras]

About 10 or so. Most of them were gifted to me by my tennis coach.:)

[@thomasthomas8049]

A couple of years ago I was at a nine round tournament. This was right when the London started to catch on, I think Carlsen had just played it or something. At the tournament, I saw a man with a large book on the London system. It must've been 250 pages or so. Just the thought that someone would spend 10 hours reading a book on the London ... of course each and every one of his games as white started with the same ten moves.

[@SpaceCadet4Jesus]

Not much different than 2000+ players cranking out their theory moves repeatedly as seen in SO many high level games. In fact, just mindlessly following theory has resulted in so many predictable and boring games that top professionals, like Kramnik and company, have complained and have considered new rules for chess, like no castling, or FischerRandom. My opinion is the London is a good safe below 1700 opening, but can be played at the highest levels. Anyone who ONLY plays the London will miss out on the full beauty of chess, but its still a playable opening. The problem isn't the London, the problem of stale chess is "US", we are to blame and our tendency to focus only on theoretical winning lines while missing out on the geometric beauty of chess.