1 f4 is it playable ?

LOL, I did this once and eeked out the win...though I think my opponent was too baffled to really take advantage.

Ha!  You're right to a degree:  transpositions are very important with flank openings, and one of the weaknesses of 1f4 is limited transpositional potential (too committal!).  I mean, 1g3 is a horrible opening if you're not prepared for several transpositions.  But the English and the Reti stand very well on their own--though you can avoid certain counter-strategies with e4/d4 transpositions, if you know and prefer them.

That's how the devil invented the Caro-Kann. He meant to play the Sicilian.

Claude Bloodgood wrote a book on the Grob. I have it.

I've read a synopsis of it.  (Ever read about his life?  Wow...)  I think 1b4 accomplishes a lot more than 1g4 in the grand scheme of things, though it's probably just a matter of taste as to which you judge better.  1Nc3 usually yields a Veresov or a Vienna Game--innocuous openings, but I bet they score a lot better than the long fianchetto!

The games and analysis are available for free download in ChessBase format. Don't remember where I found it, but Google knows.

I read about his life decades before I played or saw anyone else play 1.g4.

A couple of guys at my local chess club play the Orangutan. One is Santa. He plays the Polish as Black. I win more than 90% of my games against him. My rating is about 800 higher.

I play both on occasion.  What I really like about them is that ignoring the flank, building up the center, and developing logically is the WRONG way to beat these openings.  But if you address the threats right away, they're not so hot.  So I play them pretty sparingly.  Fun, though...

I think none of the players here is a GM, so , why to play an opening simply because they do?

Remember you're playing an opponent, yes, that guy on the chair in front, not Carlsen, not Nakamura. So make the moves that ANNOY HIM (again, not Carlsen, not Nakamura) I've played 1.f4 in tournamments and stayed with 93 minutes after 10 moves while my (stronger) opponent had just 10 and position was +=!!!! If I had entered his Najdorf, things would have been completely different

i really get angry when people say in this opening white has advanteg or black has eqalized. because only in some oppenings this is true for example in the sicilian najdof white has a hundred tempis but black has 

compassion for something else .And the special case is in the symmetrical oppenings but then black has eqalized 

no tell me why is not good as f4 see this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sbL8cVIGZs

if one pawn move weakens the king side so much whe shold stop playing the KID or the dragon

Lol. You must be a very strong player.

Hey the Nimzo-Larsen is not on par with the Grob!  The Nimzo-Larsen is a great opening whereas the Grob just weakens the kingside. 

It's playable, but more so if you're right-handed 

LOL, 4b3?  Why not 4g4?  Or 2g4, for that matter?

4 b3 in the above positions is the well known "Chiaroscuro gambit".  It is somewhat tactically unsound, but positionally very deep.  If you can make it through the ensuing tactical complications, you are likely to have a sizable plus. 

Because you have an opponent who overlooks forced wins?  lol, that is a plus...

This is suicide for lower rated players, I think you have to have an 1700/1800 + rating to play this.

Well, I did say there were complications...

I play f4 going into a stonewall attack. By playing f4 I avoid benoni.