good lines against the London System

[Roger de Coverly]

Black scores brilliantly after 2.Bf4 c5 3.e3 cxd4.

As long as you aren't frightened by supposed "laws" of not moving a piece twice in the opening, there's also 3. .. Nd5. I might worry about 3. d5 as the response to 2. .. c5, but perhaps being Tromp-like with 3. .. Qb6 or Benko-like with 3. .. b5 are decent alternatives to normal moves like 3. .. g6 and 3. .. d6.

[Chris Goodall]

Black scores brilliantly after 2.Bf4 c5 3.e3 cxd4.

As long as you aren't frightened by supposed "laws" of not moving a piece twice in the opening, there's also 3. .. Nd5. I might worry about 3. d5 as the response to 2. .. c5, but perhaps being Tromp-like with 3. .. Qb6 or Benko-like with 3. .. b5 are decent alternatives to normal moves like 3. .. g6 and 3. .. d6.

Ah, you're talking about the 1...Nf6 line, rather than 1...d5.

I've been thinking more about these lines after reading Nikolai Pedersen's chapter on the "Topalov Variation" (1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 c5 3.d5 b5 4.Bg5 Ne4).

I think Nick is right that 1.d4 c5 2.d5 is unviable except as a way to reach a c5/e5 setup, as White can't be prevented from playing e4 either immediately or after Nc3.

Having Nf6 in before ...c5 makes all the difference, because Black is in time to stop Nc3 with ...b5.

Hence in the analogous position with Bf4 instead of Nf3, I think your idea of being Benko-like with 3...b5 is enough to defuse any worries about 3.d5. Now White's gonna have a d5 problem if she just bimbles along with Nf3 and e3. Nd2 also hangs d5, so does White have to resort to 4.f3 already? That'll get up a Londonista's nose.

[Roger de Coverly]

I saw another one tonight.

That was the sequence 1. d4 Nf6 2. Bf4 Nh5 3. Bg5 h6 4. Bh4 g5 and now White should really play e3 or e4 hitting the Knight on h5 with the Queen rather than conceding the dark square Bishop with 5. Bg3

At move 3 (!) , alternatives are Bd2 and Bc1.