As long as you're playing the Reti against all of Black's possible replies, it won't make much of a difference in most lines. However, White could use the move order 1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 in order to see what line Black goes for, and then deciding whether to continue with 3.d4 (against ...e6 or ...c6) or to continue in Reti style with 3.g3 or 3.b3.

In addition, Black might not be able to play his favourite anti-Reti setup in fear of 3.d4. I had that issue against a Reti player once. I wanted to play 1...d5 (usually I play 1...Nf6) 2.c4 e6 3.b3 Nf6, but I knew he would also sometimes play 3.d4, which would take me out of my repertoire. On the other hand, I would be happy to play 1...d5 2.c4 c6 3.d4, but I wasn't that happy to play the ...c6 setup against the Reti... Had he used the 2.g3 move order instead, I could have played 2...e6 with confidence.

What is the problem of 1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 d4 for White? You can play like a White Benoni one tempo up, or with 3.b4!? and really pressuring the d-pawn.

nyoke wrote on 03/27/08 at 08:15:28:


i suspect this question is based on a false premise, i.e. the idea that there IS an optimal move order.

I'm sure there are many reasons why a person would choose to play 1. Nf3 d5 2. c4 (as I always do) but I'm equally sure there are reasons to play other ways too.

I doubt very much it is possible to prove, objectively speaking, that one way is better than an other.  Much more probable is that it comes down to which options you wish to exclude for Black and that will be more a matter of personal preference rather than objective merit wouldn't you say?

After all, if we want to start about 'optimal' openings with regard to seeking an opening advantage as White we probably wouldn't play 1. Nf3 in the first place.

edit:-
and if we were to play 1. Nf3 for reasons of our own the 'optimal' 2nd move following 1. ... d5 is almost certainly neither 2. c4 nor 2. g3 but 2. d4

nyoke wrote on 03/28/08 at 12:52:49:

By playing 2.c4 and threatening the positionally-desirable 3.cxd5 White severely limits Black's options.

After 1.Nf3 d5 2.g3, Black has (among many other moves) 2...Bg4 and 2...c5. Neither is good after 2.c4 (2...Bg4 3.Qb3; 2...c5 3.cxd5).

But after 1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 Black has to show his hand: what will he do to defend his d-pawn? Black chooses among 2...e6, 2...c6, 2...dxc4, and 2...d4 -- each of which reveals the 1.d4 defense Black is willing to play. 

After each White can choose how best to meet Black's setup: by transposing into a main-line 1.d4 opening (not, of course, possible after 2...d4) or by continuing in the Reti/English vein.

Basically the question is why the move-order 2. c4 3. g3 would be better than 2. g3 (perhaps) to be followed by 3. c4 So we're looking for moves that do not allow transposition between the two move-orders, like ...d4 (followed by taking e.p. in case of 3.c4).
I agree this is a highly unlikely move, so the question remains.

Okay, let's work this out. 1. Nf3, d5 2. g3, d4 > the only move that makes a difference. And now everything after 3. c4 simply transposes except the  en passant ... dc3: And this simply helps White 4. Nc3, so ?
Is it some kind of fobia, the deep unconscious fear for the unoccupied centre or worse,  the fear for having too much flexibility/many possibilities  ?