The Mason Attack (which really isn't that much of an attack) is more commonly called the London System these days. It's not the same as the Stonewall Attack although they have many similarities. The main difference is the early development of the QB outside the pawn chain in the London System whereas, in the Stonewall Attack, the QB is inside the pawn chain. Placing a knight on e5, supported by pawns on d4 and f4, is an integral part of the Stonewall Attack whereas that type of setup MAY occur when playing the London System, but not necessarily.
GM James Mason attack .A variation of the London system or deserving recognition as a formidable att
Sort:
Feb 16, 2021
0
#43
Instruction as to how to play the London System often starts off by saying, "Just place your pieces on these squares no matter how Black responds." That is code for - "This is not a very aggressive opening." It's not aggressive but it's a good choice if you are White and confronted with a far superior player playing the Black pieces. It just about guarantees you will not get tricked in the opening nor have any early weaknesses. It will serve well to prolong your eventual death and make Black think hard on how to crack that nut.
I never heard it called anything but "The Mason Attack" until the last year when they started calling the "Accelerated London". Couldn't care less what its called. it works for me.
Called by who? Show any piece of published chess literature that calls it "the Mason attack".
Sites like chess.com only start calling them these things so they can have something to name every opening and then others online think they're really called that.