1.d4 2.Bf3 3.Nc3

Where should I look for information about an opening where white ends up somewhere around theses three moves?

 Closest I could find was the London system, which has Nf3, and focuses attack on the kingside.

There's no way to play Bf3 if you haven't played 1 e4 and 2 Be2.

:) sorry, Of course I meant 2.Bf4 !

But hey, That's probably not a bad idea either. I'm just looking for something different to study up on to throw the 'academics' off their game. It's getting annoying that the person I'm playing knows what I'm gonna do before I do.

I would not recommend this system for White.

1 d4 Nf6 2 Bf4 e6 3  Nc3 Bb4 = 

Black equalizes on move 3. Not very challenging. 

If you are looking for unusual d-pawn systems with unclear theory, why not the Torre attack. 1 d4 d5 2 Nf3 Nf6 3 Bg5

Or, the Richter-Veresov: 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5

k. You mean Black has equal hold of the centre? I'm only new to chess, not quite up on the linguistics.

and Bb4 gets a3 which might turn the bishop back.

Yes, Black has an equal position because after ...Bb4 he is threatening Nd5.

For example  1 d4 Nf6 2 Bf4 e6 3 Nc3 Bb4 4 e3 Nd5 5 Nge2 Nxf4 6 Nxf4 d5 =

I would slightly prefer Black in this position. (Bishop pair, no weaknesses, bad light square bishop can be solved.)

Well, all the moves that have reason behind them have been pretty much explored :)

I was just wondering about some irregular moves, such as these three, which leave white ready to do some damage in most cases, esp with the first few moves aiming at a fork on Black's Queen side rook and the king.

Seems to draw black over to the Queen's side, then White does more along the London system down the King's side. Only just started thinking about it today, But if there's already a school of thought about it, and games to study as well, then I'm wasting brain cells re-inventing wheels as usual.

Richter-Veresov, Torre attack et. al. are what I consider standard Queens pawn attacks, nowhere near as thought about as the other e or d openings, but still can be read about. Could be interesting, But like I said, the idea is to do some damage first, and to draw black into a bad spot.

The real issue for openings is: what problems does it pose for your opponent. The openings I suggested are both unusual and do pose problems.

If an opening is unusual only, but does not pose a real chess problem, then your opponent will be able to quickly find an ordinary solution to it, rendering it ineffective. 

this dose not make sense

i dont get this opening on the 2nd move Bf3 impossible an ilegal move!

How is it posible u get it to

So weird just so weird

I know just how boring it feels to play openings that someone else came up with and where you don't get to think much for yourself but you seem fairly new to chess and I think it's way too early for you to start inventing new opening. There are a few books on general opening theory wich might interest you, none comes to mind right now, probably since I find studying openings pretty dull.

If you're still set on inventing new openings though then avoid thinking about early attacks and more about the general look of the board after the opening. 

What squares are you attacking? Where are there weak points in your defence? Do your bishops have any open diagonals they can use? How is your control of the center? Can you reduce your opponent mobility or create weak squares in their defence? How is you development? Can you castle? How do the pawn structure look? Are there any isolated pawns?

There are alot of things to look at in the opening. If you ignore the important things and focus on a early attack you're probably going to end up in a bad position after the opening.

what thread?

oh Bf4

muhahhahahahhaahahaahaahahahaha

dead!!!!!!

:)

is your location also prophesy?

Cheers bloke :)

It's not that I'm interested in inventing a new opening, Just want to throw a spanner in the works when playing people who've memorised the opening lines.

Neneko, as for my just attacking and getting weak advantage, You're right, I should think not just about doing damage and wrong-footing black, It's also about pawn structure and having my pieces on active squares. But like I said, I only just started thinking about this and there's alot of variety available in these three moves. How to respond to my opponents defence and get those advantages you spoke of is wht I want to find now, and was hoping somebody had already worked it out :)

As to controlling the centre, why is that a good thing? think about it, do you have to control the centre from the word go? one of the nice things about these three moves is that black is most likely to try and control the centre, thinking that I am doing the same (badly). But like the modern defence for black, the advantages of the centre can be regained.

If noone knows where I can find info about an opening like this, then I guess I'm going to have to find out how to do it myself, at least I may learn to be a better player in my middle game :)