unorthodox openings

The move 3.a3 is weak except against the OutFlank Attack (1.b4 c6 2.Bb2 Qb6 3.a3 a5 4.c4! axb4 5.c5 Qc7 6.axb4 Rxa1 7.Bxa1).

Against about anything else, it's weak:

1.b4 e5 2.Bb2 Bxb4 3.Bxe5!

1.b4 e5 2.Bb2 d6 3.c4!

1.b4 d5 2.Bb2 e6 3.e3 (or 3.Nf3) and if 3...Nf6 (3...Bxb4?? 4.Bxg7! +-) then 4.b5!, making it hard for Black to develop his Queenside, rather than the weak 4.a3?!

1.b4 e5 2.Bb2 f6 3.e4! Bxb4 4.Bc4! with compensation.

Englund Gambit used to be my guilty pleasure. I wouldn't say it's good, in fact the complete opposite, however it managed to catch out a few unsuspecting opponents many years ago.

in the polish , white should avoid playing a3 prematurely, reason being, in moat lines, the b-pawn will go to b5, and the a-pawn will go to a4. (they are some exceptions, in some formations, like those with e6-nf6 d5 and c5, a3 is fine if white plays bxc4,in some other lines, where white plays b5, an early a3 might not be too bad a time loss since a3 covers the annoying bb4+ that often happens after d4).

my whole repertoire is unorthodox openings. i like them all, but i particularly like the d5 nimzowitsch defense (1.e4 nc6 2.d4 d5) and the english defense. the english is the equivalent to giving the finger to all the modern chess principles (knights before bishops, occupy center with pawns first, dont take your queen out early, dont develop knights in the rim) and still getting decent positions. its highly unbalanced too with very small draw percentage

1.d4 e6 (or 1.b6 ) 2.c4 b6 3.nc3 bb7 4.e4 bb4

Resource?

I've seen numerous articles, and 2 full-fledged books (Play 1.b4 and 1.b4 Theory and Practice, the latter being the better of the two but also the more theoretically dense) covering exclusively 1.b4, and both show b5 to be better than a3.

The b5-square is White's typical strong point in the Polish, and it impedes Black's development of the queenside pieces.  This especially becomes an issue with the fact that the Bishop wants to go to d7, but the d7-square is the only way out for the Knight with a White pawn on b5.

With a protected pawn on b4 instead of b5, Black's development is significantly easier!

1...e6 is better than 1...b6.

After 1.d4 b6, the move 2.e4! is much stronger than 2.c4.  Not saying 2.c4 is bad or loses, but the English Defense is a sound defense.  Owen's Defense is questionable at best!

So if your intention is to play the English Defense, you are better off playing it via 1.d4 e6 2.c4 b6, and now of course, White has more options than just 3.Nc3.  He also has 3.a3 or 3.e4 Bb7 4.Bd3 and now Black has 4...Nc6 intending 5...Nb4 and 6...Nxd3 or the older line, 4...f5.

Of course, you will need to know the French Defense if White does what I do as White, 1.d4 e6 2.e4.  Of course, I also play 1.d4 b6?! 2.e4!.

i dont know where you get the confident assessment that the Owen's is questionable but English is not. IF anything, the English is more gimmicky in some of its ideas. they are some lines of the English that engines have completely shown to be unplayable that were once seen as main line  back 20-30 years(that engine would scream +2). with the Owen's , even the more questionable side variations rarely rise above +0.7. )

many english defense players are also comfortable in the owen's, not only that, but the 1.d4 b6 move order has some advantages, for example, white is forced to play nc3 to support e4 (or the inferior nd2) as opposed to more challenging lines like 4.bd3, you also avoid stuff like 1.d4 e6 2.c4 b6 3. e4 4.bb7 4.f3! which is better played for white WITHOUT committing nc3. (if bb4+ you play bd2,).

show me this line in the owen's you so fear. i personally play both and if i were to play really booked opposition , i would fear a bad eval more from english defense than owen's by far.

For starters, you DO NOT avoid the Bd3 lines.  Again, I will re-iterate, after 1.d4 b6?!, the move 2.e4! is stronger than 2.c4.

Black should not play ...b6 until c4 is committed!  So 1.c4 b6 or 1.d4 e6 2.c4 b6.

After 1.d4 b6 2.e4! (NOT 2.c4?!) Bb7 3.Bd3! e6

(3...f5 is crap!  4.exf5 Bxg2 5.Qh5+ g6 6.fxg6 Bg7 [6...Nf6 7.gxh7+ Nxh5 8.Bg6#] 7.gxh7+ with a big advantage for White)

4.Nf3 c5 5.c3!  (This is the entire point.  Once the pawn is on c4, White doesn't have this and the English Defense is fine.)

After 1.d4 e6 2.c4 b6 3.e4 (3.a3 does raise a couple of questions on soundness of late - I have not played this defense myself in about 6 years with the exception of one game, but the Owen's is still worse) Bb7 4.Bd3 and here, 4...Nc6 is ok and so is 4...f5.  The difference here is after 5.exf5, you don't take on g2 leading to the same garbage.  You play 5...Bb4+ (A move not available in Owen's Defense as White again has 6.c3! there) and after 6.Kf1 Nf6, Black has compensation for the pawn!

The English Defense is a bit under a cloud these days because of 3.a3, but Owen's Defense I consider even worse than the Latvian Gambit!

so basically, im a master that plays both in open tournaments and researches some of its lines 20 move deep,you havent bothered to play these lines in years, and your brilliant analysis ends in move 5. really!? your refutation of the owen's is 1.e4 b6 2.d4 bb7 3.bd3 e6 (i prefer nf6 myself) 4.nf3 c5 5.c3? ihave analyzed lines of the owen's to 20-25 moves and this is the scary refutation you provide? 

and now you are comparing the owen's to the latvian which is frankly ridiculous. put any engine after 5.c3 and the latvian and see what they tell you. absurd.

if you want to go about not aanlyzing concrete lines, you can just as easily wave off the english with some abstract nonsense like , now that the c pawn is on c4 instead of c3, d4-d5 simply gives white a better game unlike in the owen's where d4-d5 is bad without the c-pawn.

I have nothing against uncommon openings (like 1.g3 in post number 14). However, these openings often do not claim the center immediately (like 1.g3), or neglect some other opening principle. Doesn't it make sense to simply say "thank you", and take what the opponent is giving you for free? For example, after 1.g3 I would prefer to claim the center with 1...d5, or even 1...e4: 1.g3 should not be underestimated though. In fact, this could easily transpose to a Reti line, or King's Indian Attack quickly (both are sound). After say 1.g3 h5 2.Nf3, I already would of disliked h5 prematurely played. Perhaps I just have too much or a fondness for positional lines, but I would of rather followed a main line compared to something like 1...h5. This applies to all unorthodox openings I face, but of course even something like 1...h5 may be playable if you know theory with it (or familiar with the line[s] if theory is, more or less, non-existent).

Oh for sure, 1...d5 is better than 1...h5. But i like to play 1...h5 because it'll throw the 1.g3 player for a loop, being prepared for normal responses like 1...d5, and perhaps not so prepared for an aggressive 1...h5. Often, if white doesn't know what he is doing, that h5 pawn will end up destroying his kingside position with a timely h4 (which I often play as early as move 2, unless 2. Nf3, just for funsies) and even sometimes h3, kicking the bishop off the diagonal, and obstructing castling. But objectively, 1...d5 is undoubtedly better.

It has not been YEARS since I've played these lines.  I have played the English Defense as Black over the board as recent as 2017, and have always considered it one of my main three weapons against 1.c4.  Owen's Defense I have faced as White in recent times, multiple times, but have not played specifically the Black side of it since at least 10 to 12 years.  There's no reason to play something that is "speculative at best", and that's being generous.

I actually can't recall a person not named Miles Ardeman that has ever gotten a winning position against me in OTB competition with 1...b6 (or 1...b5 for that matter, which I have faced as recently as January 2018 - I had White in the following game:  1.d4 b5 2.Nf3 Bb7 3.Bg5 a6 4.Nbd2 d5 5.e3 Nd7 6.Bd3 Ngf6 7.O-O e6 8.Ne5 Be7 9.f4 h6?? (A HORRIBLE MOVE) 10.Bxf6 Bxf6 11.Qh5 Bxe5 12.fxe5 O-O 13.h4 f5 14.g4 Qe8 15.Qxe8 Raxe8 16.gxf5 exf5 17.Rxf5 Rxf5 18.Bxf5 Nxe5 19.dxe5 Rxe5 20.Bg6 Rxe3 21.Kf2 Re6 22.h5 Rf6_ 23.Kg3 Bc8 24.Rf1 Rxf1 25.Nxf1 Be6 26.Kf4 Kf8 27.Ke5 Ke7 28.Ne3 c6 29.Nf5+ 1-0 - Black NEVER HAD A CHANCE!), and even Miles lost because his phone went off in a FIDE rated event (actually the same tournament as the 1...b5 game above but a few years back!)

I had a student throw Larsen's at me last week - which I found to be very drawish if you defend in the hypermodern style (which I do).  He had luck in scholastic play with it, but 1. ..Nc6 seemed to close off his initiative rather quickly.  I was also tempted to reply 1. ..Nf6, tempting the exchange to open up the g- or e-files for a rook.

a lot of GM's would say english defense is just as speculative as the owen's (a failed QID im sure they would call it). I dont hold this to be authorative. I hold the engine and the few top players who play these lines a bigger authority on these matters then the chess hoi polloi, but my point is that there is something delightfully absurd in brushing off the Owen's while thinking the english is "objectively sound".  unless we start discussing specific lines in both, common opinion in these matters is an all or nothing proposition.

also, what does that ramble have anything to do with the topic? 1.d4 b5?! transposes to the st.george or leads to a polish opening one move down which is really bad news for black. irrelevant anyways. you cant compare 1.e4 b6  with 1.d4 b5.  

hehe i think you are unto something  which  i can confirm from personal experience. 1.b3 works great when black wants to fight, 1.b3 e5 or 1.b3 d5 intending c5 always leads to a good fight. 

But when black gets super passive and conservative, say playing a nf6, g6, stuff or going for a QID formation, its really hard to spice up the game. especially agaisnt a somewhat weaker players. you can try to go for a bird system and throw an early f4 but bird has given me mixed results agaisnt those that dont fight back. you can also go for space with d4 and c4 but then the fianchettoed bishop is somewhat passified.

1.b3 b6 is just infuriating because black can play the mimicry for quite a while without problems, any excessive deviation is prob just a bit better for black.