New St. George: Three Pawn Attack

Well, I got it several times recently while playing St. George as black.

Your analysis of white's and black's prospects ? 

3. c4 is usually considered dubious for exactly this reason: 3. ... d5.

Better are 3. Nf3 or 3. Bd3.

Thanks, I think that U are right.  However, my experience shows, that many players with intermediate ratings prefer this Three Pawn Attack that looks natural and aggressive. 

By who?

I, for the life of me, do not understand just why one would want to play an opening and then avoid the established theory for something that is potentially many times worse.

Refutation ?!?  LMAO  I played St. George a lot vs players in the range 1800-2100 and never had any troubles during the opening stage. 

I mean, it's basically a French defense in which black has played a6 early. Whether that can be exploited in any way is up to the skill of both players, but with accurate play and assuming roughly equal skill level between the two players, there's no real advantage for either player out of the opening.

I think the Mastro is correct but you could go one step further and just play 4.Nc3 which gives Janowski's variation of the Queens Gambit from the turn of the 20th century. I believe it does not have a good reputation for Black

And while on the subject:

• Just why is it that why the subject of the "St. George" occurs there is always someone who trots out Karpov v Miles Skara 1972? Where not unsurprisingly the much more forthright 5. e5! Nd5 6. Ng5! e6 7.Qf3! is always conveniently ignored.

• Why is it always assumed by some noddys that the "St. George" is a set of ridge moves in a specific order? Case in point 1.Nf3 refuting the "St. George", why not just play 1...b5? The relationship between the St George and the Polish Defense is a fine line.