After 1.d4 d5, When White Avoids Theory: What Plan Does Black Need Against London, Colle and Torre?

At a club-level rapid tournament in Da Nang earlier this year, I sat and counted. Of forty games that opened with 1.d4 d5, only nine continued with 2.c4. The other thirty-one branched into a different world: some players brought the bishop to f4 and then played e3, c3, Nbd2 — the London System; some chose 2.Bg5 — the Trompowsky; some built the Torre before castling; some played e3 and Bd3, waiting to strike with e4 — the Colle. Black, who had spent a week revising the Slav and Semi-Slav, suddenly had no idea what to do in the first ten moves. I recorded each game in my notebook, dividing the board into eight zones out of old habit, and realized one thing: the real battle in amateur chess lies in who is willing to spend time learning the modest systems nobody bothers to name. International Master Valeri Lilov, a Bulgarian trainer, has just released a series of six instructional videos on handling exactly this group of openings. The content revolves around a simple fact: after 1.d4 d5, most players with White avoid 2.c4 to dodge the vast body of theory in the Slav, Semi-Slav, Queen's Gambit Accepted and Orthodox Queen's Gambit. They choose lighter but still dangerous systems: the Colle System, Trompowsky Attack, Torre Attack and London System. Beyond those four, Lilov also goes deep into the Catalan, the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit and the Richter-Veresov Opening. In each video he lays out a concrete plan for Black, rather than simply listing variations. This repeats across many Vietnamese chess venues. Ten years ago, when I still organized small tournaments, amateur players rushed into main lines to prove they knew their theory. Now the younger generation takes the opposite road: fewer variations, less risk, more plans. The London System has become a familiar sight at clubs, and that raises a technical question few answer properly: what is Black supposed to do when the opponent refuses to play by the book? A few facts help place this group of openings. The Colle System is named after Edgar Colle, a Belgian player who lived from 1899 to 2026. The Trompowsky Attack is tied to Octávio Trompowsky, a Brazilian player. The Torre Attack recalls Carlos Torre Repetto of Mexico. All three emerged in the early twentieth century, but they surged back only once chess engines showed they were harder to refute than people assumed. Based on my experience following games at amateur tournaments, this is the group of openings that costs Black the most thinking time in the first fifteen moves. From a structural angle, every anti-theory system has its own mechanism, and Black needs exactly one matching plan. The London System is a slow build: White plays Bf4, e3, c3, Bd3, Nbd2, keeps the centre solid, and only then looks for the e4 break or Ne5. Black fights back with an early ...c5, brings ...Nc6 and ...Qb6 to press on b2, and looks to trade the light-squared or dark-squared bishop depending on the position. The key point is never to let White play e4 for free. The Colle System follows the order e3, Bd3, c3, Nf3, Nbd2, and only then pushes e4, opening the diagonal toward the kingside. Black neutralizes it with ...e5 or ...c5 hitting the centre directly, using ...Bd6 or ...Bf5 to blunt the bishop on d3 before White can strike. The Trompowsky 2.Bg5 is an early bishop sortie meant to trade pieces or damage Black's pawn structure; ...Ne4, ...d4 or ...e6 followed by calm development with ...c5 and ...Nc6 is enough to keep the balance. The Torre Attack with Bg5, e3, Nf3, c3 works similarly: Black needs ...e6, ...Be7, ...c5, ...Nc6, ...b6 and Bb7 to neutralize it. The three extended systems run on the same logic. The Catalan pushes g3 and Bg2 to create pressure along the long diagonal; Black either accepts ...dxc4 and follows with ...b5, or plays solidly with ...c6, ...Be7 and castling. The Blackmar-Diemer Gambit 2.e4 is a pawn sacrifice; Black must accept and defend accurately, or decline with ...e6. The Richter-Veresov with Nc3, Bg5, e4 demands a tidy response from Black: ...Nf6, ...e6, ...Be7. Italy at Euro 2026 did more than press; they taught all of Europe how a collective breathes. Defending against the London or the Colle is no different: Black's pieces must move as one block, and Italian pressing is music that has to be played together, where one mistimed beat breaks the whole symphony. A Black piece on the wrong square in these systems does not lose a pawn at once, but it exposes an entire plan to the opponent. Here is the counter-intuitive view: most of Black's losses against these openings do not come from White's system being strong. They come from Black trying to punish it too early. Facing the London, instinct takes over: play ...c5, ...Qb6, then push pawns forward. But that very eagerness creates the weakness White is waiting for. In my notebook, most of Black's defeats happen after move fifteen, once too many pawns have advanced before development is complete. There is one more thing rarely said: the rise of the London and the Colle in Vietnamese amateur chess reflects a fear of calculation more than a strategic advance. Players pick a system to reduce the number of variations they must remember, and in doing so they push the opponent into a position that demands calculation from move three, where memory saves no one. I once mislabeled a piece of SHB Da Nang footage, and I learned that football does not forgive carelessness. The board is the same: a move made out of complacency leaves a trace readable for the rest of the game. Next time, sitting with Black after 1.d4 d5 and watching White bring the bishop to f4, instead of asking what theory says, ask what their plan is and how you break it. Lilov's six videos will not calculate for you; they only hand you a map. Walking that map without stumbling remains your own job in the next game.