Here is another game with a similar variation. No doubt all of these variations give Black equality but white virtually always is the one attacking/with the initiative and few players (particularly Nimzo-Indian players) can honestly say they enjoy defending.

And anyway, no one can fault Rudels suggestions then?

Quoting games were significantly higher rated players won doesn't prove any opening advantage. The fact that Yusupov plays it quite a bit, at least against e6 lines, shows it is a reasonable opening. Black can avoid d4xc5 with early b6, if bothered by it. 

This shows technique of finding games to support own point of view. In game showed were Yusupov won, he was on the way to being rated third highest player in world. In game I showed more of a trainer playing a slightly higher rated player.

In position were 10...c5xd4 played think it is better if white had played a3, instead of f4. Not sure if you are bothered by dispruting nb4 though. Eingorn thinks 12...Ne4 instead of Rc8 is very nice for black. In general don't think black has much to fear in this setup. Has played classical moves and peices are on active locations.

Is Rubinstein system playing d4xc5 when applicable or something else?, am not very sure myself.

Yusupov must have got his theory mixed up .. I think 9. f4 is quite weird, in most games white tries to complete his development before starting a kingside attack. 9. Bb2 is far less commital, followed by a3.

Also with the Rubinstein Attack (I think, I might not be correct) that white does not immediately play Ne5-f4-Rf3 etc, instead playing in the centre or on the queenside but with a Zukertort-type structure

Here is a game of Rubinstein himself playing his system

Hi Markus. I think I can help you if you're still interested. Been studying this for about a year. And my rating is approximately 2000. What's yours?

On Rudel not knowing chess it's his raw chess understanding. Take for example one of his comments:

'I have taken ' , or 'I think' to this effect then quoting that anyone over 2000 is the goal to reach when studying what to do in this opening. When the real goal is 2400+. Then there is no positional analysis. It's only explaining the research how a player of his level understands it. (last I heard he was 1500-1700)

Probably the best way to study this is to decide to play everything that is classical and sound. Follow Artur Jusupov as an example. You transpose to the zukertort. And main lines should feature pushing e4 or c4 when necessary.

Reason I say this is because most people who take this up do it because they want an easy system that they can avoid things. And that is kind of bad. You need to have certain ideas that come from certain openings to progress. So here is why Rudel's book is good. It has a decent suggestion for dealing with early B excursions. And the Phoenix attack is a good alternative but his explanation is lacking. It has a good base but you have to study why..

My suggestion would be to pick up Bogdanovich's book and use Rudel's book as a supplement. For the side lines. My experience shows his research against the Bf5 and Bg4 are sound at least. And the Phoenix attack is fine, just another development. Bogdanovich is an IM and can explain the positional ideas necessary to play at a higher level. The only down side is he only discusses pure zukertort so transpositions are necessary. That could be where Rudel is decent.

If you're interested maybe we can meet and collaborate?