I remember studying that Korchnoi-Bronstein game many years ago.
1. c4 e6 2. g3 f5 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Bg2 Be7 5. O-O O-O 6. Nc3 d5 7. d3 c6 (7... d4!? 8. Na4 Nc6 maybe isn't terribly convincing, but it prevents the e-pawn thrust)
8. e4 dxe4 9. dxe4 fxe4 10. Qxd8 Rxd8 11. Ng5 e5 12. Ngxe4 Na6 13. Bg5 and maybe
13...Bf5 is a more persuasive path toward equality. The knight can come to b4 if necessary.
I'm not trying to refute your claim (which is correct), but only to point out that Black fighting for the centre (as distinct from resorting to the Classical against any opening from White) makes more sense. To be more specific, I'd be inclined to play
1.c4 e5 and then some variation of ...d6, ...f5, and ...Nf6, where White's first move gives Black some flexibility.
Quote:Schiller (1999) Hypermodern Opening Repertoire for White, pages 133-137, analyzes Moutousis - Pjami, Zouben zonal 1993:
1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 c6 3.b3 e6 4.Bb2 f5 5.g3 Nf6 6.Bg2 Bd6 7.O-O O-O 8.d3 Qe7 (Schiller also considers 8...Nbd7, 8...b6 and 8...Bd7) 9.Nbd2 e5 10.e4 fxe4 11.dxe4 d4 (Schiller also considers 11...Nxe4) 12.Ne1 c5 13.Nd3 Nc6. Schiller says “It is hard to believe White has all that much here, but ...” 1-0 in two games.
I'd want to look at Schiller's notes and comments, but I'd bang the Stonewall drum all day long if this is the kind of position I got from it. Black looks terrific here. Sure: White got to play e4, but Black has to be markedly better here, no?