"Conquering the Colle"

Black does quite well to stick to the main lines against the Colle system. I play it myself sometimes as White, but only if Black seals his QB in with an early ...e6. Here is an example of a line that offers approximate equality with double edged play.  Be sure to use the Move List button to see all commentary and analysis.

You haven't answered likeforests point that the Colle is basically a Semi-Slav with an extra tempo. Do you also think then that that is a terrible opening? You would be saying that you know more than countless numbers of Masters, but logically if you are claiming that the Colle is terrible then you are obligated to also claim that the Semi-Slav is!

Also, by the way in almost all lines that I know about in The Colle White actually gets to use his dark square Bishop earlier than black! And it will become more active!

I could go on and on about how many faulty points you've made but I think it's been proven that you don't have much of an argument here and should just accept that, unless you have some amazing crushing refutation for the Colle that will make you famous in chess circles. Because at the moment all you have for backing is that you beat some guy at your club a few times, and that White's Bishop doesn't initially get developed.

And all you've got to show that white gets his bishop developed earlier than Black is games in which Black also locks in his Bishop. In this case the one who gets it out first with e4/5 wins with the extra Bishop, and this is usually white because of his extra move. Why not do this from the start?? By the way, "White gets to use his dark squared Bishop earlier than Black in almost all lines" cannot be true as it is possible for Black to develop his Bishop on move 2 (d4 e6 Nf3 B?) when to play the Colle white has to Block in the Bishop on move 3. you must be referring to the ColleVColle lines but as mentioned this proves the weakness as well as opportunity.

I don't have an amazing refutation. What I have instead is a rather mundane record in which I have never lost against the Colle since I have known it is called the Colle (3 Years and 60 games).

What am I supposed to say about the Colle other than the Bishop gets trapped? All the other developments are fine but (this is important) they can be played anyway after the Bishop is developed (London/Torre/Tromp systems).

On the Colle V Slav issues this might be a manifestation of Black's disadvantage. Black can't develop the Bishop without running into trouble (1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bf4?! 5.Qb3) so he either chooses a mad system (the dxc4 lines) or a solid one to go for the draw. Such pessimism is pardonable for Black and inexcusable for White.

I disagree. The Torre is one of those openings where White will usually play c3 at some point instead of c4, and if you look at the "theory" for that you'll see that in a lot of lines even at Master level White has very good chances for an advantage.

I'll answer that when I have the time, but I'm too tired at the mo.

I play the crap out of the Colle as white. It is just hard to learn all the QP openings when you don't have time(like most of us). To make it more interesting I play Nf3 and b3 then either the Colle/Zuckertort or  the Nimzo-Larson system. Gives it more flexibility and surprise. The Kings Indian is the most difficult to play against either way. It is always better to have a position you are at least familiar with to get in a comfort zone and not blown out of the water right away. I like the kingside attack also. Good topic!

 cool opening

• "And all you've got to show that white gets his bishop developed earlier than Black is games in which Black also locks in his Bishop."- Which happens to be almost all, if not all of the recommended lines for Black.

• "In this case the one who gets it out first with e4/5 wins with the extra Bishop, and this is usually white because of his extra move. Why not do this from the start??"- You seem to be saying that White can just develop his DSB out from the start without any negative concequences at all, but you will be surprised to hear that there are actually quite strong reasons to merit leaving it at home for the early stages! Many a time has the undefended b-pawn it leaves behind been the bane of the Torre player. Here's a sample main Torre line where Black gets to basically equalise all because of White's potential b-pawn weakness: 1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Bg5 Ne4 4. Bf4 c5 5. e6 Qb3 6. Qc1 Bf5 with roughly equal play for both sides.

• "By the way, "White gets to use his dark squared Bishop earlier than Black in almost all lines" cannot be true as it is possible for Black to develop his Bishop on move 2 (d4 e6 Nf3 B?) when to play the Colle white has to Block in the Bishop on move 3."- It is possible, but not advisable. I would go so far as to say it is foolhardy in fact! White can just transpose into a QG and as any strong player knows Black's DSB should not be developed out early in the QG. E.g: 1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Bf5? 3. c4! So as I said before your Colle smashing method of "using the extra Bishop" won't work in reality against anyone who knows how to play it properly, and White will get to develop his Bishop out earlier but not so early that he has to worry about a strong, early Q-Side initiative from Black. I think you'll find that using the extra Bishop can be quite tricky when the other side has it.

• "I don't have an amazing refutation. What I have instead is a rather mundane record in which I have never lost against the Colle since I have known it is called the Colle (3 Years and 60 games)."- Wow, the next Bobby Fischer! I notice that number has also magically gone down from 700 games to 60. Go a bit lower and it may start to sound plausible. Also, please post some of those games where you "smashed" that guy from your club. I'm dying to see them..
  

 The reason the number went down is I originally gave all the games, then looked again for colle games.

I still think you're not being broad enough in your consideration of what you're playing the colle against. Once White plays d4 black can respond with practically anything he likes. You've only been considering d4 d5 wheras black can play anything (Benoni, Grunfeld, KID, QID). In these Black doesn't trap the Bishop.

I am being broad enough, as White gets to choose against which lines he plays it. And what you are saying is that unless White can advisably play the Colle as a system against everything then it's bad? The d4 d5 variations are a large part of theory and if Black plays any of what you have said then White can/should transpose into something else to meet it, just like many other systems.

So do you now accept that it's a solid, if not aggressive way to play against the d5 variations as you've clearly got nothing to prove otherwise. Or if not that, then at least admit that it's only your opinion that it's bad and not a fact as you have been saying.

I don't think you understand that it's ok not to develop the dark squared bishop right away. I don't play the colle, but I play the queen's gambit, and e3 is in many variations superior to Bg5 or Bf4. The problem with an early Bf4 is that for one it's exposed and also  it isn't clear how many problems immediately the bishop will cause for black even if it looks nice. There is no way to punish the undeveloped bishop and instead in both the colle and QG white plays for e4 more quickly, since then the bishop will be open anyways. It's usually very temporary. It's probably this rapid central expansion that allows club players to attack more than in the london system.