Why is it that d4 openings that move the DSB to f4 early, such as the London system or the Jobava London, are considered to be less optimal than other d4 openings like the Catalan or QG and are not played at the highest level?
Don't know about that "less optimal" thing...but they do tend to be really really REALLY boring.
Weak b pawn perhaps
The Queen's Gambit Declined variations also feature alot of Bf4 games these days as well' . The London is the London & works well sometimes (Not always) BECAUSE others see it as boring . The Jobava is a different animal/story as it's a Veresov (Early Nc3) with Bf4 put out there first & has f3 involved many times . There are differences in the Bg5 lines yes & The Catalan . Also Opening with 1 Nf3 can transpose to many different Openings & can lead to situations where you while having White can have "black" with an extra Tempo like in a Gruenfeld Reverse where you can just win a pawn or cause havoc seemingly for 'free' if the person you are playing against gets too aggressive or you can try to play a queen's indian or nimzo indian with an extra move . So finnaly to answer your question @HeyyItsDylan 1 d4 2 c4 is generally considered 'main line theory' which is an attempt to play for advantage yes true considered slightly 'more serious a try' than others throughout history or1 e4 . Recent experience tends from computers to believe Black is about Equal with good play from Black in the Opening but nothing is "That" simple so all in all a good question from you as you want specifics worded out , In Short I can say the differences are real but never underestimate Bf4 in many Openings @HeyyItsDylan
The main disadvantage of the Bf4 lines is they relinquish control of a color complex.
Or to put it in lay mens terms:
The Bf4 lines give White dominate control of the Dark Squares on the Chess board, but it allows Black to dominate the Light Squares on the Chess Board.
The Queen’s Gambit & Catalan lines are Greedy!
They start off controlling the Dark Squares.
Than they start building up their positions to take over the Light Squares.
They seek to dominating both Square Color complexes.
Obviously, if Black player has half brain in his body, he isn’t going to allow the White side player to try and dominate it all.
The result is you end up into these long slugfest battles which have been analyzed and studied to death in order to help Black avoid being over run or to help White pounce on Black.
The above reason is more or less why some of the lines are more favored vs. others.
Another way of saying the above is by saying the Catalan & Queen’s Gambit lines are more ambitious vs. Bf4 lines.
———————
Most of the hatred about the Bf4 lines are true.
The Bf4 lines can be boring.
The Bf4 lines can be lacking ambition.
The Bf4 lines can be draw-fest.
However, 1 thing I want to clarify, All the above lines mentioned have been played at the highest level of chess.
They still get played at the highest of levels.
An the reason why is because the Bf4 lines do have advantages as well.
The Bf4 lines allow White & Black to get into safe even position.
The Bf4 lines can be very solid.
The Bf4 lines often have less Theory.
Some opening lines in Queen Gambit can go 10 - 15 - 20 moves plus into Theory.
If you forget to play the right move at the exact time, You can end up down checkmated.
Some opening lines are unforgiving.
The Bf4 lines / The London a lot of these openings are not as merciless.
Now again, I don’t want you to get confused.
All opening which have been regularly played in chess have some form of Chess Opening Theory.
Their are moves which have been established which strong players deem better vs. other moves.
So for example:
The London system has opening theory, BUT what you have to understand is the manner in which the Theory plays out.
Some Opening Theory plays out similar to a Circus Carnival Person walking on a tight rope 7 story’s off the ground.
1 miss step or slip and you fall 7 story’s down - SPLAT on the Floor!
London Opening Theory plays out similar to a Fair Person sitting on a Platform over a Pool of water.
1 miss step or slip and platform falls causing you to get dunked in the water.
Both situations are not ideal, but you can actually walk away and potentially recover vs. the London situation.
@HeyyItsDylan said in #1:
> Why is it that d4 openings that move the DSB to f4 early, such as the London system or the Jobava London, are considered to be less optimal than other d4 openings like the Catalan or QG and are not played at the highest level?
Because the bishop has the very important task of guarding b2, and the bishop on f4 could be a problem when Black pushed e5.
One top GM would beg to differ - Lê Quang Liêm
He has one chessable course - on the London System.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.