As there have been a lot of posts in a short period of time and there have been a lot of points made, I will quote all of these and comment on each person's replies.
If you don't understand the point of the english opening or transpositions to d4-openings you're surely better off getting a beginner's book on openings.
To be fair, these transpositions are very common and intricate, and indeed one of the main advantages of the English is its transpositional potency. Watson's 'Mastering the Chess Openings Volume 3' is a great book for discussing these transpositional options, but will still provide the reader with high-quality analysis and a strong repertoire. The simple view of the opening is that leads to positional play and let's white choose whether to enter d4 openings or not (vs other responses than 1...e5 and 1...c5). No Nimzo, Benkö, Benoni, Grünfeld and others.
Books like Khalifman's on Kramnik's repertoire enters d4 openings. Kosten's and Marin's stay away from d4 openings.
Obviously you can combine both approaches to keep opponents guessing. 
Versus 1...e6 and 2...d5 (I assume you mean white) can choose to play QGD, Catalan or Reti. Reti is the simpliest but has had a reputation of not putting much pressure on black. I'm keen to see what Marin suggests.
Here is my evaluation of each option:
- QGD: My personal favourite option as White, and if you want to fight tooth and nail for a theoretical edge, then this is the best option. Via. a 1.c4 e6 2.Nc3 d5 3.d4 move order you are not even committed to Nf3, so finding an option to your liking should not be at all difficult here. If you use a 1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 e6 move order, this rules out the Exchange Variation, but the 3.d4 Nf6 4.Nc3 and 4.Bg5 variations both offer White good chances of an edge, the second option being a good way to reduce the amount of theory in each line.
- Catalan: Another good choice, but only if you like positional games and have some patience. I strongly recommend studying Avrukh's book before venturing into this territory.
- Reti: I was initially skeptical of 3.b3 but recently I have analysed it and quite like it. You can avoid a lot of theory, but the flexible nature of White's setup still gives him a marginally more comfortable game. I don't like the move order 3.g3 as much, because of 3...dc4 4.Qa4 Nd7 5.Qc4 a6 6.Bg2 b5 7.Qc2 Bb7 8.0-0 c5 when Black has a comfortable game. If you want a low-theory option, this is definitely the route to take, although I can't find any edge for White in the 3...Nf6 4.Bb2 Be7 5.g3 0-0 6.Bg2 b6 variation. Nonetheless this will probably be Marin's choice as the other choices would make the reader reliant on buying Quality Chess's other books (not necessarily a bad thing in itself but obviously some potential customers would not like this).
---
Compare two ways of aiming for the English: 1. Nf3 and 1. c4. The first option does not allow 1. ... e5 but Black can play 1. ... d5. The second option allows 1. ... e5, but it rules out an immediate ... d5.
There is more to it than this. With 1.Nf3 you retain the option of playing a KIA, and with 1.c4 you retain the option of 2.Nc3/3.e4 against the Nimzo or KID, for example. You can also play 2.g3 although this will transpose to 2.Nc3 or 2.Nf3 (assuming Black does not play 1...e5, then it is a somewhat different matter). Playing 1. c4 only makes sense if one can avoid the main lines of 1. d4 d5 with reasonable theoretical success. However I am not sure how White manages to avoid KID, GID or NID/4 (where Black does not engage in the center immediately) and how this affects the consistency of the repertoire. Only Marin's suggestions about Black's attempt to move towards a 1. d4 d5 line is relevant. I don't know if that has been mentioned already but I would like to know what he recommends against 1. ... c6, 1. ... e6 and 1. ... Nf6 & 2. ... e6.
White can avoid the KID with the Reversed Sicilian setup (which is just equal, but even so Black must be on his toes), meet the Grunfeld with a few Anti-Grunfeld setups including an early Qa4+ and e4 Nc3 dc3 setups, meet 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 with the Mikenas Attack, the Zvjaginstev Attack or Kramnik's favoured 4.Qc2/4.Qb3 (not to mention the quiet 4.g3 and 2.Nf3 e6 3.g3), and the 4 setup is not so convincing after 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.Nc3 b6 4.e4 Bb7 5.Bd3!. Against 1...c6/1...e6/1...Nf6, 2...e6, I have no idea what Marin recommends, but will take a stab and say 2.Nf3 d5 3.e3, 1...e6 2.Nf3 d5 3.b3 and 1...Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4, although this does heavily overlap with Dangerous Weapons: Flank Openings. ---
I disagree. White can easily avoid GID and NID/4 (and others). This is important. It's a matter of taste if you prefer playing vs NID/4 (and others) or you think you have better chances of getting an advantage vs 1.c4 c5 or 1.c4 e5. [White can also try 1.Nf3 which avoids many e5 lines but it's less flexible.]
Yes, he can easily avoid the GID/NID/4, but obtaining an advantage in these lines is not easy. The same applies for the 1.d4 lines, though. For what it's worth, the majority of GMs think White has better chances of an advantage after 1.c4 c5 compared to 1.c4 e5 although with best play Black should equalise in both lines (especially if Black avoids the Hedgehog which has been under heavy theoretical pressure of late). ---
"White can easily avoid GID and NID/4 (and others)"
Not so fast! It's not at all easy to avoid a King's Indian. To do so usually lands you in an inferior line. I've checked Dynamic English, Soltis' book, and others...usually a transposition to the Fianchetto KID is indicated or you get a sloppy line that actually works against White. At least in my study and experience this has been the case.
Well 1.e4 is one way to avoid a King's Indian. Seriously, if you want to avoid a pure KID just avoid d4, although don't expect to gain any advantage out of the opening. I assume this is what you mean, and I agree with you. ---
You mean avoid as in "Opening for White according to Kramnik"? I don't think you can classify those "Anti-X" systems as pure English positions. At best they are hybrids and you can not do without 1. d4 theory.
I'm not sure what you mean by this, can you give me some examples? If you mean the 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Qc2 setup, then these are not hybrids as White will usually play d3 instead of d4 to control the e4-square and generate play along the long diagonal with b4 and Bb2, especially if Black has already played ...Bc3. ---
The anti-Grünfeld, the anti-Nimzo and and anti-4 are of course somewhat similar to the respective d4 opening, but they are different and can be a very good reason to play 1.c4 (or 1.Nf3). More so than your suggestion of anti-QGD, in my opinion.
The anti-QGD's, QGA's and Slav's are admittedly a fully valid reason in their own right. Avoiding the Slav is especially tempting given its very high theoretical reputation at present, and the Gurevich system does give White a very easy to play attacking system that forces Black to defend with precision. The same could be said of 4.g4 against the Nimzo-English - easy to play (although creativity is a large bonus), and hard for Black to defend against. This may change as the theory of these variations become more and more detailed and more accurate defensive resources are found for Black. ---
I didn't include the KID in my list. "And others" referred to the Budapest gambit and similar d4 openings. (I should have mentioned that.) Black can play in KID-style vs the english without d4 with reasonable success.
Agreed. It is noteworthy that in 'A Strategic Opening Repertoire for White', advocating 1.c4, 2.Nf3 and 3.g3, the authors spend nearly half the book on this system alone, speaking volumes about the KID's high reputation as an antidote to English setups. Personally I would have chosen the Fianchetto Variation over the Reversed Sicilian for the book, but that is an entirely different subject matter. And if you got this far...1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.b4 is another quite interesting anti-KID setup which at least contains some surprise value unlike the majority of other anti-KID's.
Pages: 
Grandmaster Repertoire 1.c4 by Marin (Read 378005 times)
