Don't know when Appleberry plans to publish his book (perhaps it's already out). I'll have to ask him.
I think it's meant to be a repertoire book and contains analysis by several different people. The cover probably won't carry Martin's name though. He's the publisher of "Carpathian Warrior" and "Tiger's Modern" and always contributes to the analysis. I think maybe the authors on the cover will be Lalic and Okhotnik again.

I first drew attention to the possibility of deferring the From in the poll-thread "From Gambit -Current Opinion". But the discussion was marred by petty bickering and was soon abandoned in favour of a debate on the Fischer Defence to the King's Knight Gambit between MNb and myself in the "1. e4 e5" section (that turned sour as well actually).

Anyway, I didn't take it seriously myself at first, but on closer inspection it appears to be very challenging! After 1. f4 d6  ; 2. Ktf3 e5 we have : 

- 3. fe g5 ; 4. ed (otherwise, after let's say 4. e4 g4 ; 5. Ktg1 de Black is simply better) g4 This is the difference with the standard From, White does not have Kth4. Now 5. Kte5 Bxd6 ; 6. d4 transposes to a drawish sideline, but perhaps Black can improve, for example with 5. ...cd!? Accepting the second pawn is critical of course. 5. dc Qxc7 ; 6. Ktd4 Bd6 is where I ended my "analysis" in the previous thread, and I haven't much to add to that except that Black will be regaining one pawn by force, with excellent compensation for the other one. 

- 3. e4 fe transposes to the Fischer Defence to the King's Knight's Gambit. Now I won't offer an assessment until I've worked out some of the murky details, but suffice to say it's one of the best defences. Please note that Black avoids the Bishop's Gambit (available to White against the standard From) which is universally (at least on this forum!) considered White's best option in the KG accepted.

- Bailing out with 3. d3 ef ; 4. Bxf4 d5 ; 5. Ktc3 Ktf6 ; 6. Qd2 Bd6 (6. ...Bb4!?) is perhaps White's most judicious choice. Normally this structure would be favourable to Black, who has a strategic pull on the e-file and dark-squares, but the tempo loss with ...d6-d5 coupled with the initial headstart balances the chances.

Instead of 2. Ktf3 :
 
- 2. e4 d5 gives White an unpleasant choice to make. I think 3. e5 c5 and 3. ed Ktf6 (3. ...Qxd5!? ; 4. Ktc3 Qa5  with an "f4 Scandinavian" is also good) ; 4. c4 (4.  Bb5+ Bd7 ; 5. Bxd7 Qxd7 ; 6. c4 c6 , 6. ...e6 and 4. ...Ktbd7 all also give more than sufficient compensation) c6 or 4. ...e6 should be discarded in favour of 3. Ktc3 which limits White's problems to the weaknesses created by the advance of his f-pawn.

- 2. d4 leaves Black spoilt for choice. In addition to the thematic 2. ...e5 ; 3. de (3. fe de) Ktc6 ; 3. Ktf3 Bg4, he has the options I mentionned earlier :
2. ...f5 followed by ...Ktf6, ...e6, ...Be7, ...0-0 ...b6, ...Bb7, ...Kte4, ...Ktbd7,
2. ...d5 (or first 2. ...Ktf6 followed by ...d5), ...Ktf6, ...Bf5, ...e6 etc
2. ...Ktf6 followed by ...Bf5, ...Ktbd7, ...c6, ...Qc7 and ...e5  

- 2. other move allows Black to play ...e5 "free of charge"


[quote author=laughingcow link=1159040122/0#8 date=1159382596]So I generally want to play it like a Pirc?[/quote]

Well, after 2. e4 it's possible of course to seek a transposition to Pirc/Czech/Lion/UDKP/Mestrovic etc  Defences with 2. ...Ktf6. Now 3. e5 Ktd5 ; 4. d4 Bf5 is a sideline of the Alekhine where 5. c4 can presently be met by 5. ...Ktb4 instead of ...Ktb6. After 3. Ktc3 on top of the options mentionned above Black has 3. ...d5!? ; 4. e5 d4 ; 5. ef dc ; 6. fg Bxg7 and once again the f-pawn is misplaced.
Also an option is 2. ...g6 with an f4 Modern Defence 

The move 1. ...d6 is subject to various completely different interpretations of course. Another independant line is 2. Ktf3 Bg4.

So I generally want to play it like a Pirc?

[quote author=Uberdeker link=1159040122/0#3 date=1159203450] 
After 1. ...d5, Black might prefer to develop his K's Knight to -h6. Martin Appleberry has recommended 1. ...Kth6 in a recently published (or soon to be published) book. The reason he prefers this to 1. ...d5 is the line 1. ...Kth6 ; 2. b3 e5.[/quote]

Martin Appleberry's suggestion works, as a trick:
1. f4 Nh6 2. b3? e5 3. fxe5 d6 4. exd6 Bxd6 5. Nf3 Ng4, and without checking variations, I think black has already a decisive advantage, although Fritz does not see it already.

But what about normal development? 1. f4 Nh6 2. e4 looks fine to me, for sure after 2 ... e5. In any case I would be pleased to see 1 Nh6 at the board.

1. f4 d5 2 Nf3 g6 etc and Nh6 to follow, after this it is easier I think for white to play for an advantage then after Nf6.


[quote author=Uberdeker link=1159040122/0#3 date=1159203450]
After 1. ...Ktf6, Black controls -e4, but he can still do without ...d5. For instance he can go for a ...d6/...Ktbd7/...e5 plan. This is particularly effective against a Stonewall set-up. 
But until someone refutes my deferred From (cf. the thread "From Gambit : current opinion), my preference goes to the immediate 1. ...d6.[/quote]

I also consider 1 .. Nf6 as more accurate. 1 .. d6 contains some additonal venom, but how does it look like against the stonewall?

Also, considering I might very likely be facing this from a Black point of view, what could I do then because it is never easy facing your own opening.  I am fairly convinced that 1...Nf6 is the best option because it is so flexible, but what sort of setup would I adopt then?

Thanx very much

Can someone give me a good line to play after 1. f4 Nf6?