Something looks strange for me. Why has he recommanded 2. g3 ?

Since he recommends Nf3 in most variations where the black knight comes to f6, I don't really see which variations he avoids so except :
1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Bb4
1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 d6
1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. Nc3 Nc6 4. g3 Nd4.
The Keres variation in its Nc3 form, but I thought the Keres was less inviting against 2. Nc3 than against 2. g3.

Is any of these variations annoying enough to deprive oneself of all the nice lines after 1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 ? (Panov, Mikenas, QGD exchange...)

GMTonyKosten wrote on 09/28/09 at 14:33:00:

I've just had a look at the PDF excerpt and can see that it is the latter!
Jacob, if you send me a review copy I promise I will only say nice things about it!

To me it is obvious that there are advantages and disadvantages to all move orders. There simply has to be.

About claiming an advantage. Maybe the grunfeld is at one point in time the safest opening for Black, which will make a 1.c4 move order preferable, then the English does not offer White much suddenly - and so on.

What Mihail has done is to find a lot of moves that can inconvenience Black. Long, long term, we probably cannot escape that the beginning position is a draw...

Alias wrote on 09/26/09 at 05:49:46:

Which is sort of intersting. I think the opening is always a bit of a battle to get into a position you know better than your opponent. Ideally, you also want a position that for you, just is better. As you describe it above, the b3 Reiti is a shortcut - a bit like "I can't remember all the moves over the board to play a QGD or Catalan, so I play something slow and positional instead that I might know better than my opponent." I'm not sure if that is the "right" way to think OTB though. There are just as many different variations that may arise after a Reiti as a QGD, it's just we don't have as many names for them, as they aren't interesting to theory, not being a good +. So why not play the QGD or Catalan over the board? You may not remember it all, but even so, you have better odds of hitting the +.

To me, when I see 2.g3 English system played against me OTB it is a psychological victory. A better player will still crush me in the middle game or ending, but I know I have come through the opening unscathed, and will get a reasonable position with opportunities - that's pretty good for black in the opening.

F22 wrote on 09/25/09 at 23:45:20:


White is fighting for the advantage. It's just that QGD and Catalan probably are better tries. Since it's very difficult to prove advantages for white in every line in QGD or Catalan (or any major opening), some white players prefer the easier Reti option. Reaching some equal position which you understand well is not so bad either, especially in OTB games. For CC games I don't think I would use it.

F22 wrote on 09/25/09 at 23:34:27:


Personally, I think 1...e5 is the first move that is the most fun to play against. 

By the way, Marin has some discussion about all of this in the Foreword of the book in question. You might be interested to hear that he says the reason he switched from 1. Nf3 to 1. c4 was because of 1....d5 against the former. 

MNb wrote on 09/25/09 at 21:55:49:


If (1) is true (which I doubt) then the case for playing 1. c4 gets stronger. My point was that when you play 1. c4 you are allowing 1. ... e5. Now if your opponent can force you into a 1. d4 d5 main line, playing 1. c4 instead of 1. Nf3, just gives him/her an extra option.

F22 wrote on 09/21/09 at 06:58:17:

I disagree as well. I would rather say that playing 1.c4 only makes sense if
1) one can avoid the NID/QID complex with reasonable theoretical success, which seems the case.
2) one has reasonable theoretical success against various independent options for Black has well, which is much harder to prove.