What do you play against the English and how did you come to play it?

With the English like with most openings we're faced with a variety of choice. What do you play against it and why?

Does anyone play 1...e5 and if 2.Nc3 Bb4 like I do? I saw that this was called the Kramnik-Shirov Counterattack, which in my opinion beats the Sicilian Dragon for coolest sounding chess opening.

Though I just started using this recently. I don't really know what would be best for me to use against the English, perhaps I should aim for a more open game.

Hopefully even some English players themselves will chime in about what they use against it as Black.

1...e5 is said to be the most dynamic (i.e., winnable by Black) response to the English Opening, and 1...c5 is said to be the most drawish response. I play for a draw initially, so I use 1...c5, the Symmetrical Variation.

()
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/suggestions-against-1-c4
()
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/game-analysis/vs-english
()
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/what-is-the-best-response-to-1c4

Not my best game, but it shows how I'm always figuring out how to get a drawish position in order to nullify any possible advantage by my opponent...

Thanks for sharing that great game.

Against the Reti, 1.Nf3 I play 1...c5 "The Sicilian Invitation" since I play the Sicilian against 1.e4, but often they transpose to some kind of symmetrical English. So I guess I'm actually playing both.

Against a normal move order English I've been using 1...e5 because I think the Kramnik-Shirov Counterattack is interesting, but I don't completely understand that opening yet. It's a Rossolimo in reverse. I was also thinking perhaps a reversed closed Sicilian, because then Black would get to attack on the Kingside. But I feel like I understand open games better. And then there's all these things like The English Defense to the English Opening that I read Daniel King wrote a very good book on, at Amazon it got very favourable reviews. It's hard to decide what to play.

I play a lot against the computer and it opens with 1.Nf3 and 1.c4 just as much as 1.e4. So I'm twice as likely to get 1.Nf3/1.c4. I decided this would be a great opportunity to learn some kind of "good" opening against these. So far I've just been using Old Indian set-ups against everything but in the Old Indian I often have problems because my dark square bishop ends up passive and it doesn't equalize whereas with something like 1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Bb4 the game is already equal and unlike the Old Indian it's not likely the dark square bishop will be a problem.

I play 1c4. From the other side I like b6, as I think it asks questions of white's understanding. I've heard it's unsound at higher levels, but I think it demands precision from white who can easily go wrong. For black I also like symmetrical with e6 systems, and in the King's English, I like early Bb4 pins where allowed.

Yes, 1...b6 is what Daniel King wrote a book on. I read King was an expert on that opening and people really seem to like that book.

For me a large part of choosing an opening is if I can find comprehensible study material explaining the ideas. I'm interested in the Kramnik-Shirov counterattack, but at the same time there are a lot of things about it I don't understand, just like the normal Rossolimo. I mean I get the very basic thing,  you trade a bishop for a knight to double the pawns and then have all your own pawns on the opposite color of your remaining bishop, but I saw in some games GMs playing pawn breaks as Black that undoubled the pawns. It's just a weird opening.

After 1 c4 e5 2Nc3 Bb4, I think white has to play Nd5. Statswise he does well with this. From the black perspective he has several alternative bishop moves and a5. Black can study just one branch here, whereas white needs to look at several.

There is a Foxy video on the KS line. Recommended in this video is the bishop retreat Be7. Black accepts a possible knight for bishop trade and plays a structure of d6,Ne7 with f5 coming up with possible kingside attack - always nice. It reminds me of certain lines in the Nimzo.

I think they call it the Kramnik-Shirov Counterattack because you have to be someone like Kramnik or Shirov to understand what's going on. It's as if at first the Black player says "I am already playing Black, so now let me expend two tempi to give you the bishop pair and more pawns in the center". Then White says  "No not that! Instead let's both move the same piece several times in the opening." Mind = blown.

Well I'm sort of kidding. I do understand this dance between the bishop and knight (although it's still a bit weird that this should happen) it's the resulting middlegames that I find perplexing. I noticed that Ivan Sokolov plays this a lot as Black. Maybe I should read his book "Winning Chess Middlegames: An Essential Guide to Pawn Structure" and then give this opening another go. I would really like to learn and play this opening but as it is now I just find it too unnatural and confusing. I think maybe I should just try to get an open game vs the English, maybe the Keres system. Can you use the Keres system vs 2.Nc3?