@IM Andrew Greet:
Thanks for your comment. From my point of view you did a great job with the book. I have played all my life 1.e4 and with Black I moved from Svechnikov Sicilian via Scandinavian to Pirc. So, I can give a personal opinion to almost every chapter:
1.      Scandinavian: 3.Nf3 is also my choice against this opening and also feared it when I played the Scandinavian with Black. I was happy to see that you choosed it.
2.      Pirc: I think the Austrian Attack is the critical try. The Be3 setup was a good choice because it is not easy to play against it and the main line is discussed a lot in other book. Especially your idea h2-h3-h4 + Rh3 against the “Umansky”- line gave me a lot of headache and for me it is almost a refutation.
3.      Modern:  Good choice but in some variation I have another opinion about the evaluation of the position but that´s chess. But this was only in a few lines.
4.      Aljechin: I am happy with the Exchange variation with White so I hadn´t a look at your line. But I was surprised that you choose the Nf3-line.
5.      Philidor: I was very surprised about dxe5 and queen exchange. My first impression was “What???? This line should lead to a better position for White”. But after a discussion with a friend who plays the Philidor your choice seems to be quite well. +/= over a long period of moves.

So, in general I am very happy with the book and looking forward for your next projects. Thanks for joining the discussion about your book.

It seems both Houdini 1.5 and Komodo 3 prefers 11.. Nc5. If then 0-0-0 then maybe ..a5 followed by queen c7 or b6 threatening Bg4. Greet mentions Qc7 directly after 0-0-0 instead of ..a5 first. ..a5 can always be thrown in later I suppose. After 11.. Nsc5 12. 0-0-0 Qc7 13 exd6 exd6 14. Bd4 he says that it gave white a pleasant edge in S.Dvoirys-G. Laketic Chelyabinsk 1991. After 14.. Bxd4 15. Nxd4 then for example ..a5 16. Qc3 Bg4 and the computers assess this as pretty equal. Black is fully developed, but might have a weak pawn on d6. Whites pawns on g2 and f4 are also a bit exposed.

Ok so then you can play Nf-e4 in the line above instead of Ng4 right?

I had an unattributed line in my notes—the Vigus must be the source of it. Of course, Vigus seemed to lean towards 5...c5 instead of castling. Does anyone have any sense of the Pirc fashions and whether 5...c5 or 5...0-0 is preferable?

9.. Nf-e4 seems okay also in that last line of yours. I will have to take a look at Ng4 in that position first to consider that.

It might be that black gets decent play also after 8 0-0-0 Ng4 though. I suspect that 6 Be3 might not be the most critical move , though maybe good as a practical weapon for club players for which the book was intended.

Are there reasons to avoid:

1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.f4 Bg7 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Be3 Nbd7 7.Qd2 c5 8.0-0-0 Ng4 ?

Yes, I agree with you about the whole setup with 6...b6, because also "Polgar-Smirin, 2000" doesn´t look very promising for Black.

At the moment I think about following the setup/game:

-> Pavasovic-Mrkonjic, 2010

1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.f4 Bg7 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Be3 c6 7.h3!? and then switching to

-> Pavasovic-Graf, 2005: 7...Qa5 8.Bd3 Nbd7 9.0-0 e5 10.Qe1 exd4 11.Bxd4.

This looks playable for Black also I fear to get cramped on the kingside with f4-f5, g4-g5 at the right moment.
I have to think about a concept for Black how I can face this plan of White and getting counterplay.

I think in the game -> Pavasovic-Graf, 2005 11...Re8 was a little fault and the direct 11...Nc5 is more accurate. The main difference is that after 11...Nc5 the pawn on f7 is overprotected after 12.Qf2, so that after 12.Nxd3 cxd3 the threat e4-e5 isn´t such a problem like in the game.