System/Ideas against the English

Incidentally, 1...g5 makes more sense against the English than it does against any other move, because the long diagonal has been weakened.  Maybe you played it 13 moves too late.

1..g5???? Why????

Here is how I beat the english

For the same reasons as 1..g6.  Fight for the long diagonal which has been loosened since a pawn cannot go to c3.

G5 is pointless if he transposes to a queens gambit. It's like g6 but worse.

Rogue that were some of the worst games I´ve ever seen...

and yes g5 is horrible. Simply 2.d4 and you have a position you could get with 1.d4 where g5 is simply 1:0 for white...

Here is a weak 2700 GM (apparently much weaker than you) who does not know he is dead lost... and he gets lucky in the end!

...and here is a 2250 Centaur, who cannot find your easy win, despite the engine aid.

Thanks dude.

I did a video presentation on this line from the Tony Kosten book, you may find it interesting, there are a number of games below the video description looking at lines in the reversed grandprix from master games which reiterate what many of the contributors here have said, hopefully you find it beneficial and will give some good ideas if you play it again- regards Robbie.

I dont know how to post a video link direct so i will just guve the URL

http://youtu.be/EHSsH2Xik6o?list=PLkioLm3kWm6baak59PRsqX3aHS5JUD-et

Pfren, you did not seriously take a game of Richard Rapport as a prove ?  Its obvious that he is a pretty crazy player who has played most openings whether they are good or not. And also he is playing against someone rated 1900, he could play 1...h5 and would win the game. g5 might have some surpising effect because there are only 95 played games with it but that doesnt mean it is objectively good. I can show you games of International Masters who played 1.Nh3 2.Na3 at some tournament game, so does that make the opening itself better? No! And in this argumentation I did not even say that the engine doesnt like it too... I guess when Carlsen plays b5-Na6 in some blitz games you will also call it a good opening...

I take it black won't be castling kingside.

Rapport likes to play all sorts of irregular openings, granted.

But when two average cetaur players try the same shit, and the game is drawn, it means that all that irregular crap is less bad than the average joe thinks. As a matter of fact, 1.c4 g5 is positionally more justified than 1.g4.

I would not play 1.c4 g5 myself, but this is not losing at once, as you may (or may not) think.

Oh, and in my database I have more than 450 games starting 1.c4 g5.

I play nf3 nf6 g3 b5 so I guess I shouldn't talk

I dont think its lost, but its really bad. I mean why play g5 instead of g6? As a german grandmaster would say, f5 and h5 are weakened for no tactical compensation. And of course, in practical games you might score okay with it but that doesnt mean its a good opening anyway. Hmm, I have to check my database. Thought its one of the newest...

Newest? Watson mentions the move 1...g5 (and the main idea) even in the first series of his English opening books, back in the early eighties...

yeah, I have the megabase from chessbase... But maybe its an uncomplete version.