What do you play against the London System?

In Marcus Smuckers London  system book this interesting and for white annoying move 3...Nh5!? was mentioned.

http://www.euroschach.de/Marcus-Schmuecker--The-London-System.html

The author considered this an interesting move and so do I especially as it annoys the London player and his desired solid structure. Often the London system is something annoying and boring for the second player but not after 3...Nh5!? .After this move the white player is the one feeling extremely annoyed. Konstantin Sakaev is using a similar approach in his book The complete Slav. In that book Sakaev recommends Nh5!? in the exchange variation of the slav (a6 included) and considers it the easiest way to equalize the game for black.  3...Nh5!? vs the London is not a very ambitious move you play when you go all in for the win but can be annoying for white and intersting when a draw is OK . White can not just play his normal London moves...or turn on the "auto-pilot" and play. If black is in a must win situation...well thats another story. There is no steamroller against the London.

The chase lines where black chases the white bishop with the black knight are not great for black. White can pretty easily hang onto the bishop or at least give black a worse position. You're better off trying Bd6 to trade the bishops if that's what you're going for.

I agree. The move is not ambitious or great. It mainly annoys white and disturbs his solid London structure. A "psycological win" for black against the London. The London player is not allowed to play his game. The system with Bd6 was given by Jacob Aagaard in his Meeting 1.d4 book. In the book he considers it an easy equalizer for black. After 3...Nh5!? white must move his bishop to g5 or retreat it. After Bg5 black follows up with h6 and g5 getting the bishop pair (paying a price for it of course). If white retreat his bishop black can calmy retreat his knight 4...Nf6 taking the draw if both players agree to do so.

Yes The Qb6 system (in d4-d5 structure) is often used by strong players. I would also like to mention John Watsons and Yelena Dembos system vs the London if you are playing a fianchetto system as black. They recommend for KID and Grunfeld players to play an early c5 and Be6 and then go Qb6. Then white can not play Qb3 beacuase of the bishop on e6.

eork 3.h3 white is just losing a tempi for nothing. Black should play something else than 3...Nh5 and should equalize easier.

No, I mean black can't get the bishop with the knight without taking on serious weaknesses. Your original example is not optimal play for white. It should be 1. d4 d5 2. Bf4 Nf6 3. e3 and black can't play Nh5. Even after that point if white plays Nf3, then black Nh5, white plays Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Nfd2 and that's not pretty for black. I would hardly consider this outcome as a psychological win for black. If I'm playing white I'm in a pretty good place psychologically since my position is better.

If you have:

1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 is the correct move order

If you have:

1.d4 Nf6  2.Nf3 d5 3.c3 is the correct move order

Out from this move order :   1. d4 d5 2. Bf4 

I would play :  1. d4 d5 2. Bf4  e6 (instead of Nf6)followed by Bd6.  Black is rock solid and many London players are annoyed by the bishop coming to d6 also White then usually drops his bishop to g3. Black has no real theorethical problems here. Although white has certainly a practical advantage as(s)he has probably played the posiitons hundreds and hundreds of times if (s)he is a stubborn London player.

I play a King's Indian setup. Bd3 is a nuisance and I don't like to allow any white piece to plant themselves on e5. With the London System, it is very easy for white to get into a Pillsbury-type of attack (akin to the Stonewall) if black plays a d5/e6/f7 pawn formation. 

again, if u play for win use the systems i described at the end of first page

A lot of people say the KID is a solution but as long as White isn't playing like a robot he should have a game to play.

Ive played the London System for quite some time now and the only real ways ive seen to counter is to take a rook out quickly, prevent white from castleing and to try making a battery with bishop and queen to attack g2 after the castle.

I play the London all the time and I never find Nh5 an annoying move to harrass the bishop. You just kick the bishop back to Bb3, takes, takes and it will be an interesting game because it will be a mistake for you to castle kingside now you've just opened up the h-file.

Virtually any d5-based Black system can be played against the London, and will produce an even position after 10-20 moves.  Ditto for the Indian systems, as well.

Then the harder part confronts you.  What next ?

You opponent will likely be familiar with the resulting position.  You won't.  And that's why it's used.  Very Simple.

That, along with the immense amount of opening-study-time saved by the player with the white pieces.

Actually, the London (or Reversed Slav) was originally developed in the 1920s as a non-theoretical way of playing against the KID.  For much the same reasons, as above.

Odd that all of the "refutation" examples start with white playing a sub-optimal line that allows the bishop to be taken easily. Try 3. e3 instead of 3. Nf3. That will be a more interesting discussion.

Grischuk uses the London to beat some guy from India. All of you London debunkers can kindly note when Nf3 is played. 

It's never about the opening, it's always about the players, instead.

The best opening is the one you know better than your opponent -- that includes the London, and many other "reversed systems" with the white pieces.

Indeed, if you want a reversed opening with large theory, play the Botvinik Formation of the English from the white side, as per GM Tony Kosten's book (The Dynamic English) and GM Mihail Marin's book (Vol 1, on the English).

Ditto with the KIA, and Larsen's Attack.

But regardless, in all these cases mentioned above, be prepared to drown a bit in the size of those (still rather narrow) opening theories.

Or just screw the opening, and play the Hippo from both sides, a la WCC Spassky in his later years.

Most "mainstream opening" are largely a matter of personal taste, except on GM Mount Olympus, and within these forum threads.

The London is boring, especially when your trying to use chess.com for OTB tournament prep and you get like, 7 in a row (along with the french exchange, slav exchange, KID attack, KID defense exchange, and the "give me a draw now!" defense...)