I hate transpositions..

So, I decided to try the Veresov, had a look at a few games, decided the Richter attack wasn't for me so after 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Bg5 c5/c6/Bf5 play 4.Bxf6 and work against those doubled pawns. If 3.Nbd7 then 4.e3 and head for a Stonewall set up (as recommended by GM Nigel Davies). First run out my opponent unfortunately goes 3..e6 and I can't see anything better than 4.e4 - the classical French! If I wanted to play against a French defence I would open with e4 goddamit! I know people go 1.d4 e6 to get the same result but I wil go 2.c4 and accept a Queens Gambit ,Dutch or Benoni or some kind of English opening.

Is there really nothing better (or a reasonable alternative) than 4.e4 in this line of the Veresov?

Hm...I'm guessing you're stuck with that.

You can't do anything about it. Also, he could even play 3... Nbd7. Actually, I think you will not really be able to minimize opening theory with the Veresow. Why not simply learn some line to play as White against each of the Indian/Benoni systems? Black can tell you which of those he wants to play, but White can dictate which of the variations is to be played (e.g. for the King's Indian the 4 Pawns Attack etc.)

I didn't want to minimise opening theory, I wanted to play the Bxf6 line of the Veresov!  I know what you are saying, I am quite happy to play 2.c4 and go into a Kings Indian or Nimzo Indian, I just fancied something different...just not a Burn Variation of the French, which is what it ended up as...

You mean he should move the bishop again? After 4.Bf4 Bb4 5.e3 and then all of

5...0-0/c5/Bxc3/Nbd7

Black should already be better.

I have used the exact same transposition to befuddle would-be Veresovers. You can either learn the French or play something decent as white with 1. d4