BENONI or BENKO ?

Uhm, I trust a Benko guru over some IM Patzer that can't say anything more than "nonsense".

Sergey Kasparov even says it himself in a book he wrote for Black, around the conclusion area of his book.  Black has absolutely no problems what-so-ever in lines where White declines the pawn, and the line that gives Black problems these days (book was written late 2012) is the Fianchetto Variation, and if you go thru the book, it's one of the few chapters where White scores quite well.

I also seem to recall in another post that this IM Patzer didn't even know that 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 Nxe4 drops a pawn for Black.  Therefore, his "nonsense" comment is NONSENSE!

Thrillerfan, as someone has already pointed out in this thread, there are several ways to decline the Benko. Yermolinsky recommended one simple method in  Road to Chess Improvement, and top GMs have used several different Benko Declined lines. 

I do think the best correspondence lines against the Benko are in the Accepted variation, but there are plenty of practical ways to play against it that give white every chance of scoring a full point.

No less an opening guru than Vladimir Kramnik as even tried 4.Nd2!? 

The declined lines for white are certainly not useless . 4 Nd2 , Nf3 and Qc2 all do pretty well and so do  5 b6 and 5 e3 . If white wishes he can also avoid the benko rather easily . 

Try 1. D4 nf6 2. C4 c5 3. D5 b5 4. Cxb5 a6 5. E3, ... It's my personal favorite

where can I find some good videos on the benko?

Is the benoni really refuted by the taimanov?

what would you recommend for someone who despises fianchettos from either side of the board, is tired of slav related stonewalling, and would be happy to trade as many pawns as it btakes to rip the position open to get his pieces swinging? it seems like there's NOTHING I can find that suits my style against 1.d4. 

I've always wanted to play the albin, but looking at it today, it seems very theory heavy without the initiative I get from my favorite king's gambit.

czech benoni has been described as cramped, I hate it! 

old benoni can be double edged, sounds better

benko gambit... great for kamikazees, but Ba7 is a move I NEVER want to play and the ripped open castle denied positions I've seen make it look even more hideous.

as much as people hate it, i'm thinking englund gambit might be my cup of tea... trying to immediately steer the game to a reversed open game (center counter) where i might try to play f6 for reversed BDG type positions or even a reversed smith morra which would be more familiar to me

all I know is I've had it with the stonewall straight jacket and wasting half a dozen tempi before I even START developing pieces.

indians don't look any better because of those fianchettos I also do terrible with. l like my bishops in the center, especially on c4/c5

There is the Tarrasch Defense. 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 (or 3 Nf3) c5. It makes a bid for space and freedom of movement by going 3...c5 instead of the solid 3...Nf6.

In the main lines black usually winds up with an isolated queen's pawn, considered the drawback for playing ...c5 'too soon'.

The Tarrasch Defense is no longer considered a top of the line defense but back in the day Kasparov used it to take him all the way to the World Championship. He did lose two games to Karpov in the WC and then gave it up but people that have looked closely at the games say it wasn't the defense's fault. 

At times, instead of the usual 4 cxd5, white will play e3 early and it becomes a symmetrical situation in that the black and white's position can become identical, but black has just as much space as white does, though white is a tempo up. 

At least there is no stonewalling, black doesn't fianchetto (white often does), and black has breathing room. In return black accepts having an IQP. 

There is quite a lot of theory developed around it. The lines are rather straight forward though. It can be hard to win with, one must not mind draws. White is usually better but if black knows it and not facing a Karpov it is very playable. 

yeah, I'm not big on drawish lines. I like wild double edged lines with as much mobility as possible. i'm all for sacking pawns or even trading a minor piece for a castle pair just to get them out of the way. i hate closed positions.

I really think mobility is my highest priority. that's how I turn games I'm hurting in around, get some pieces pressuring and then just keep the ball rolling until a juicy tactic presents itself. I like flexibility.

it might be very hard to get to my kind of game against d4 and all the other lines i'd need to study for. i really want to play the albin, but had trouble building a repertoire around it

My comment from 2013 wasn’t wrong, but engines and chess have developed in such a way that true correspondence chess is a dead draw regardless of the choice of Benko lines.

If we look at the practice of top players in over-the-board play, their main goal is to confuse their opponents. With that in mind, the accepted and the declined are both excellent options as long as you provide some home cooking.

Have you tried QGA and then trying to hold on to the extra pawn? I know White can take it back by force after 8 or so moves, but there are some variations which show promise. The QGD Noteboom is pretty good as well. The Anti-Noteboom scores well against it, but even that is playable. You could also see if the Budapest Gambit is worth it.

I hate that correspondence chess allows for engines. It really isn't chess between two people attempting to show off their calculation skills so much as "What Does Lc0 Say to Move Next?" a hundred times until it's blatantly obvious even to human eyes that the position is dead drawn.

the benko is the best way to play againsts d4 nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5

its the only variation where black has a good game in most benoni structures black is losing accept in the benko