I have played the St. George on many occasions, and my record with it is something like 7-3 or 8-3, including wins over three 1900s (I was 1600+ at those times). I would start from 1.e4 e6 as Black, because I'm a die-hard French Defense player. The problem I encountered was that if White didn't indulge Black by playing 2.d4, and instead played 2.d3, protecting the e-pawn, then Black's main source of counterplay, pressuring the e4-pawn (and square!), is much more iffy, and for that reason, I stopped playing it.
I also played the "Reversed St. George", or 1.a3 followed by b4 and e3. I had more luck with that, but if Black doesn't oblige by playing ...e5 and ...d5, you pretty much wind up in the same boat. And, Black's best against 1.a3 is probably 1...g6, when 2.b4 is, shall we say, not in Black's best interest. Obviously, ...d5 and ...e5 aren't
bad, but what ends up happening is that White usually has no better choice than to transpose into an English Opening, which kind of defeats the purpose of playing the Reversed St. George as an opening in its own right.
Anyway, the Basman book is excellent (I had the earlier one and gave it away; I was lucky enough to find the newer book at a chess tournament bookseller a long time ago), but to me the St. George and Reversed St. George don't quite measure up to what I would call an independent opening. They don't
LOSE, but there are ways to neutralize it.
My two cents...