At 4:52 the stronger move for white is e4, and not Ne5. The move e4 produces greater pressure in the center, and it prepares white's advance of the e4 pawn to e5, which is crucial in the London system.
Hello budy, how are you? First of all I would like to say which fantastic channel you have watched some of your classes and it is fantastic. I would like to ask you which defense you recommend playing against the london system, is there any solid defense that you recommend me?
I created a playlist about how to play against various d4 sidelines, including the London system. It's called "Black Repertoire Against d4 Sidelines", and here's a pointer to it: th-cam.com/play/PLPaM3qJ0ieXuTBTjWJbLNwOBOZMpk9NCQ.html The London system is covered in part 2, and in part 5 there are some sample games.
Jim's Chess Channel i mean the game where Onashuk played in this video he played (unless i remember something incorrectly) the same moves i saw black play when i watched a basics on the Torre Attack opening - i'm sure the structure's the same and i think (i'll check) that you did a video on the Torre Attack. I don't mean Onashuk's personal defence against the Toree i mean the defence in the general main line
Jim's Chess Channel as in with things like nf6 and e6 and if i imagine the position roughly (i'm not even a beginner so i haven't memorised much of any theory, i prefer to try and understand positions rather than have to memorise 80 moves for every move my opponent makes) the structure and piece positioning Onashuk had in this video looks to me exactly like the position and piece placement i see black make against the Torre Attack
Jim I became mildly enamoured of the London System after it being shouted from the rooftops by Gotham Chess (the guy whose tutorial system I bought-remorse) and a number of others, so I set about trying to see how useful it could be against an eternally remote-less foe, Stockfish Level 4. Now at the best of times I'm able to beat the computer *sometimes* on Level 2, so for me, Level 4 is just a joke; I figure if I just hammer out whatever trick(s) I've just learned in someone's tutorial I can at least lose with face; the computer doesn't give a shit who I am and I'll never get a "Nya-nya-na-naaa-na" from her when I lose, so I generally just go to a point in the game where it's quite hopeless, resign, and start over. And over. And over. So in general, I've found that however many times I play this system, she shuts me down barely by the time I've got the whole thing set up, mainly by advancing her pawns in a sort of wall-type structure, just shoving it up against my pieces and forcing me back, alway, *always* on the defence. Thus (with links and brief comment about each. This is just four random games from about fifty, all of which I lost): lichess.org/me4gq6Pv >>Quick takeover by queen lichess.org/nQ7Mk8Om >> Quick takeover by knight acrobatics lichess.org/0pyzqfrT >> Just plain demolished lichess.org/6F9lt4lb >> Quick shutdown by bishop Please let me know what I'm doing wrong. Thanks! --Nick
In games 1 and 2, you can simply play Bxe5, there is no danger of Queen taking bishop. In game 3 you can play dxe5 followed by Nxe5, and again there is no danger of queen takes bishop. In game 4 the computer didn't play e5, at least not until later in the game. So my question is about the first three games: why not take the pawn on e5?
@@JimsChessChannel Good god . . . I either completely didn't do the math-following through the consequences of your recommended moves-or just blindly retreated as I always have. Which leads me to my possibly *most* important question: nine times out of ten I just end up losing because of what I'll call "move blindness." In other words, either me making a move that exposes another of my pieces to taking, or just completely missing an opponent's bishop lurking up out of the centre of the action, so to speak; ie. pure mistakes of inattention or "move blindness" . . . nothing to do with gambits or strategies. Is there a video that somehow teaches about how to practice alertness or maybe things to look out for-traps, or discovered checks, or common pin traps . . . you know, not gambits or strategies, but mischievery. If I could only tell you the number of games I've lost to the "Damn-didn't see that!"-curse. ? Thanks, Jim, you've no idea how valuable your advice has proven! --Nick
When you mention "blindly retreating", that is the point that I was trying to get to. I noticed this pattern in the sample games you sent that your first instinct seems to be to retreat. I think you need to fix this problem first. Every time, from now on, when you are about to retreat, stop and ask yourself these questions: 1) can I just take that pawn/piece? 2) can I make a bigger threat? Strong players will go to great lengths to avoid retreating a piece, unless they can improve the piece by moving it. For the other problem you mentioned, "move blindness", I think the best way to work on this is to solve tactics problems. Watching a video doesn't really help with this, because your brain isn't actively engaged the way it is when solving tactics. I recommend solving easy tactics, and work on how fast and accurate you can get with the simplest of tactics (hanging pieces, forks, discovered attacks). You need to train your brain to spot these weaknesses. I have an app on my tablet called "Chess Tactics Pro" that I use. It's a free app, and solving even a couple of problems each day will make a difference. It has daily puzzles for Easy, Medium, and Hard. Stick to the Easy level, and see how many of them you can solve.
Press control + alt hold the mouse and let it slip through the board (you'll have a yellow arrow) alt will draw a green line alt + shift will draw a red arrow ☺
I replied to your comment above, but I'll repeat it here in case someone reads this one first: As I said in the video, it is a positional advantage. To see an example of how to win such a position, you can check out the game Kamsky-Dlugy 1989, I give a pointer to it in the description above.
As I said in the video, it is a positional advantage. To see an example of how to win such a position, you can check out the game Kamsky-Dlugy 1989, I give a pointer to it in the description above.
Always find myself coming back to your channel anytime I need to understand a basic chess issue. Thanks again.
Jim, I know these videos date from a while back, but you have the best opening videos out there.
Thanks!
Thanks for doing these videos. You are very professional and helpful in my efforts to learn chess using the London System.
Fabulous mate at the end. Glad I watched the whole video.
At 4:52 the stronger move for white is e4, and not Ne5. The move e4 produces greater pressure in the center, and it prepares white's advance of the e4 pawn to e5, which is crucial in the London system.
Thanks Jimbo!
Starts at 2:18.
Thank you. I always enjoy your tutorials.
Hello budy, how are you?
First of all I would like to say which fantastic channel you have watched some of your classes and it is fantastic.
I would like to ask you which defense you recommend playing against the london system, is there any solid defense that you recommend me?
I created a playlist about how to play against various d4 sidelines, including the London system. It's called "Black Repertoire Against d4 Sidelines", and here's a pointer to it: th-cam.com/play/PLPaM3qJ0ieXuTBTjWJbLNwOBOZMpk9NCQ.html
The London system is covered in part 2, and in part 5 there are some sample games.
It’s so cool that Stanley Kubrick came back to teach us a little chess.
Umm . . . how's that?
You have very good content keep up
Here is the game Kamsky-Bhat 2014 - www.chessbites.com/Games.aspx?d=kLrLCkpor
why doesn't the bishop sacrifice work at minute 32?
Good catch! I was wrong there, the bishop sacrifice does work, and Re8 can be played as the follow up. Re8 is still a key move.
Steve Buscemi?
codegeass nogla celebration
🤠
Isn't Onashuk's defense how black defends against the Torre Attack?
I'm not familiar with Onischuk's defense to the Torre attack, how does it go?
Jim's Chess Channel i mean the game where Onashuk played in this video he played (unless i remember something incorrectly) the same moves i saw black play when i watched a basics on the Torre Attack opening - i'm sure the structure's the same and i think (i'll check) that you did a video on the Torre Attack. I don't mean Onashuk's personal defence against the Toree i mean the defence in the general main line
Jim's Chess Channel as in with things like nf6 and e6 and if i imagine the position roughly (i'm not even a beginner so i haven't memorised much of any theory, i prefer to try and understand positions rather than have to memorise 80 moves for every move my opponent makes) the structure and piece positioning Onashuk had in this video looks to me exactly like the position and piece placement i see black make against the Torre Attack
Yes, that's right, the same setup is played against the Torre attack. I have some examples of it in the video I did on the Torre attack.
Taktik dan teknik francis opening mister.
Jim
I became mildly enamoured of the London System after it being shouted from the rooftops by Gotham Chess (the guy whose tutorial system I bought-remorse) and a number of others, so I set about trying to see how useful it could be against an eternally remote-less foe, Stockfish Level 4.
Now at the best of times I'm able to beat the computer *sometimes* on Level 2, so for me, Level 4 is just a joke; I figure if I just hammer out whatever trick(s) I've just learned in someone's tutorial I can at least lose with face; the computer doesn't give a shit who I am and I'll never get a "Nya-nya-na-naaa-na" from her when I lose, so I generally just go to a point in the game where it's quite hopeless, resign, and start over. And over. And over.
So in general, I've found that however many times I play this system, she shuts me down barely by the time I've got the whole thing set up, mainly by advancing her pawns in a sort of wall-type structure, just shoving it up against my pieces and forcing me back, alway, *always* on the defence. Thus (with links and brief comment about each. This is just four random games from about fifty, all of which I lost):
lichess.org/me4gq6Pv >>Quick takeover by queen
lichess.org/nQ7Mk8Om >> Quick takeover by knight acrobatics
lichess.org/0pyzqfrT >> Just plain demolished
lichess.org/6F9lt4lb >> Quick shutdown by bishop
Please let me know what I'm doing wrong. Thanks! --Nick
Why do you always retreat the bishop when the computer plays e5? Why not take the pawn?
@@JimsChessChannel But the Queen takes my bishop . . .
In games 1 and 2, you can simply play Bxe5, there is no danger of Queen taking bishop. In game 3 you can play dxe5 followed by Nxe5, and again there is no danger of queen takes bishop. In game 4 the computer didn't play e5, at least not until later in the game.
So my question is about the first three games: why not take the pawn on e5?
@@JimsChessChannel Good god . . . I either completely didn't do the math-following through the consequences of your recommended moves-or just blindly retreated as I always have. Which leads me to my possibly *most* important question: nine times out of ten I just end up losing because of what I'll call "move blindness." In other words, either me making a move that exposes another of my pieces to taking, or just completely missing an opponent's bishop lurking up out of the centre of the action, so to speak; ie. pure mistakes of inattention or "move blindness" . . . nothing to do with gambits or strategies.
Is there a video that somehow teaches about how to practice alertness or maybe things to look out for-traps, or discovered checks, or common pin traps . . . you know, not gambits or strategies, but mischievery. If I could only tell you the number of games I've lost to the "Damn-didn't see that!"-curse.
? Thanks, Jim, you've no idea how valuable your advice has proven!
--Nick
When you mention "blindly retreating", that is the point that I was trying to get to. I noticed this pattern in the sample games you sent that your first instinct seems to be to retreat. I think you need to fix this problem first. Every time, from now on, when you are about to retreat, stop and ask yourself these questions:
1) can I just take that pawn/piece?
2) can I make a bigger threat?
Strong players will go to great lengths to avoid retreating a piece, unless they can improve the piece by moving it.
For the other problem you mentioned, "move blindness", I think the best way to work on this is to solve tactics problems. Watching a video doesn't really help with this, because your brain isn't actively engaged the way it is when solving tactics. I recommend solving easy tactics, and work on how fast and accurate you can get with the simplest of tactics (hanging pieces, forks, discovered attacks). You need to train your brain to spot these weaknesses.
I have an app on my tablet called "Chess Tactics Pro" that I use. It's a free app, and solving even a couple of problems each day will make a difference. It has daily puzzles for Easy, Medium, and Hard. Stick to the Easy level, and see how many of them you can solve.
How do you draw lines on the board on ChessBase?
Press control + alt hold the mouse and let it slip through the board (you'll have a yellow arrow)
alt will draw a green line
alt + shift will draw a red arrow
☺
If you want just highlight the square you use same key (alt shift etc) and mouse click
Leandro the light Thanks!
Will Ducas gg
Please
Ok
Increase your voice
at 35:49 how white wins tnx
I replied to your comment above, but I'll repeat it here in case someone reads this one first: As I said in the video, it is a positional advantage. To see an example of how to win such a position, you can check out the game Kamsky-Dlugy 1989, I give a pointer to it in the description above.
sorry i mean at 21:08
As I said in the video, it is a positional advantage. To see an example of how to win such a position, you can check out the game Kamsky-Dlugy 1989, I give a pointer to it in the description above.