The London gets mentioned a lot lately, whenever a "pyramid" of pawns is mentioned.
But my mental default, whenever I hear of a "pawn pyramid" opening, is to think of the traditional Colle.
The London gets mentioned a lot lately, whenever a "pyramid" of pawns is mentioned.
But my mental default, whenever I hear of a "pawn pyramid" opening, is to think of the traditional Colle.
What about this pyramid?
That's not the "Pyramid" opening". That is the London System. And your line of play is bad. When Black plays a King's Indian setup, the Bishop belongs on e2, not d3. In these lines, Black can get in e5, gaining time due to the threat of the pawn fork on e4.
1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.Bf4 Bg7 4.e3 d6 5.h3 O-O 6.Be2 Nbd7 7.Nbd2 Qe8 8.O-O e5 (now we see why White played 6.Be2 and not 6.Bd3). Also notice the c-pawn has not been played yet. The flexibility of being able to c4 is critical here.
The "Pyradmid Scheme" in chess is just as much of a scam as the Pyramid Scheme is in financial crimes.
The London gets mentioned a lot lately, whenever a "pyramid" of pawns is mentioned.
But my mental default, whenever I hear of a "pawn pyramid" opening, is to think of the traditional Colle.
But do you understand WHY the Colle works here and that you cannot play these moves blindly?
The Colle is dependent upon the same thing as the Catalan and White's ideas in the French. Namely, that Black's LSB is BEHIND the pawn chain.
After 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 e6, 4.Bd3 is perfectly fine because Black hemmed in his Bishop.
But after 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 Bf5, White must play 4.c4 or he is significantly worse. After 4...c6, you are in a Slav Defense..
I had no recollection of posting in this thread, but now that I read it I agree with myself, good point.
This is real Pyramid Opening. This is also called as a London System.