Who else plays Owen's Defense to E4

Just curious to see if anyone else plays Owen's Defense to E4. I find it's like the Pirc and Modern Defenses and I usually have good game results with it.

I only play the White side via 1.d4 b6 2.e4. It is dubious at best, and saying Owen's Defense is like the modern is like saying The English Opening with 2.g3 is just like the Bird-Larsen Attack (1.f4/2.b3).

Openings that are left/right mirrors of each other are not at all the same because of the difference od the King and Queen.

Playing b6 and e6 has no real similarity to g6 and d6.

I would never suggest to anybody to go outside of the Big 4 against 1.e4 (1...e5, Sicilian, French, Caro-Kann). I personally will play 1...e5 or 1...e6 against 1.e4, but I wouldn't fault anybody that plays 1...c5 or 1...c6.

It's quite OK against 1.c4 or 1.Nf3, and pretty mediocre against 1.e4 and 1.d4.

In the Pirc and Modern you can strike at the white center with either ...e5 or ...c5. In the Owen's, ...d5 usually leads to a poor form of French Defence, and ...f5 is just weakening stuff.

Hi!

I play the Owen too and have quite good results with it. I also play the English Defense. See my post if interested in my experience and recommendations on those openings: https://www.chess.com/blog/maafernan/opening-repertoire-english-defense-against-1-d4

Good luck!

There is no Owen's Defense against 1.c4. Owen's Defense specifically does not feature c4 by White. If c4 is played, it's the English Defense (Similar to the difference between a Pirc and King's Indian).

1.e4 b6 2.d4 Bb7 3.Bd3 e6 and now 4.c4 is an English Defense while 4.Nc3 is Owen's Defense, or any other move sequence without c2-c4 by White.

Interesting comments. I'm not a deep theoretician so when I say it's similar to the Pirc and Modern all I really mean is that I cede the centre in favor of a fianchetto supported counter-attack. I'm comfortable with that form of defense and I get strong enough results to continue playing it.

A few grandmasters like Baadur Jobava, Pavel Blatny, and Ulf Andersson have played Owen’s Defense, but it’s mostly used by creative players as a surprise weapon.

It's a decent surprise weapon in blitz and bullet. I like the ideas and positions I get in the middlegame, also it's mininal in theory. If white studied this opening, you will get a cramped but playable position.

You should look for some material of GM Aman Hambleton from the Chessbrahs, he also like Owen defense and has many videos to get some ideas from.

Oh me i also play it against d4 and c4.

Not a bad opening but a bit passive for my taste

its not too bad

I think the premature consensus on the owen's has persisted longer than the actual evaluation. 
One of the most difficult lines in the owen's in the past for example, the modern engines give it like a 0.6 , barely worse than a lot of lines of the classical french.

calling it a bad french is lazy, same way calling the 3.nc6 french which even Watson has recommended as a nice sideline a bad french is just lazy.

When you compare the french owen's to similar french lines like the 3.b6 line in the french advanced, you actually realize they often play very different because:
-the addition of qe2 makes landing ba6 when it is the right plan a lot more pleasant, in some lines, black even plays qc8-qa6.
-the bishop on b7 is not entirely bad, it often stabilizes the center , protects the rook which is often traded in the queenside pawnstorm variations
-if white plays too solid, he can play it agressively with g5-g4, h5 ideas and 0-0-0, in these lines, black often sacs material to have rooks on h and g and sacs on e5 often happen to clear the b7 bishop with monstrous attacking chances. in fact, in some lines, engine recommends knight for pawn sac on e5 with concretely nebulous compensation but prefers black because the pressure is overwhelming.
This all applies to the "french owen " lines which are the lines GM Bauer popularized somewhat. They are other ways to play the owen's like the classical miles way with c5-na5 ideas, the blatny ruy lopez ,the hippo, and the pseudo hippo old indian hybrid rabjabov occasionally plays.

I think the classical owen's is in shaky ground agaisnt precise play, the blatny ruy lopez has to be wrong, the hippo lines starting from b6 may be salvageable but require a lot of elbow grease to make work agaisnt the critical continuation, and i dont know what to make of the radjabov invention

oh there is also one more way to play it which is nakamura's way, which is a lot closer to the french in some ways 1.e4 b6 2.d4 bb7 3.bd3 e6 4.nf3 d5!? (the french owen instead begins with 3.bd3 nf6). 5.e5 is fine but then , black basically transposes to those french early b6 lines in relatively favorable terms since in those lines, white often shoudnt waste time moving the bishop to d3 necessarily since ba6 is coming anyways so bb7 is not really much of a tempo loss). the real challenge of this line however is that 5.exd5! is surprisingly challenging for black if white knows how to put pressure . It plays like a french rubinstein where black successful got the queen flank but is a tempo down sort of. Playable with precise play but not pleasant or even that fun.

I play 1..., b6 against just about everything. But to be honest that's largely because it's easy to learn and I lack the time with which to bone up on; and stay abreast of developments in; the more critical lines which were my first love last century when I was almost some good at this game.

Basically both 5.e5 and 5.exd5 are good for white (around +1.0 in computer terms), and picking one of them is a matter of taste- different kind of positions, different needs, and equally grim.

Compared to the ...b6 French advance (who has gone completely out of favor) both sides have moved their bishops from f1/c8, so white has not spoiled anything.

And since you have mentioned GM Bauer, his pet line in the French Defense used to be 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bd7 4.Nf3 a6!? which tries to solve the problem of the French bishop without the time loss of the misplaced a6 knight in the ...b6 variation. This line is actually fine for Black after 4.Nf3, but white can improve with 4.c3! a6 5.Bd3, when ...Bb5 is met with Bc2. Still, not the end of the world for Black, as he can transpose after 5...c5 6.Nf3 Nc6! to a more common line, advocated in Langrock's Rubinstein French book. This is somewhat better for White, but manageable.

The conclusion is that the "Owen's French" IS a poor form of French Defense and considerably worse than the big majority of mainstream openings, although it's understandable that a Czech Pirc afficionado may well find it acceptable.

the most challenging way to play agaisnt the early b6 french is to not touch the f1 bishop , one line is to go for early h4 and to to let black to you, first c3 to force qd7 and then finally when black plays ba6, to ignore it, since you played h4, 0-0 is not desirable, and the king is perfectly safe after kxf1. playing bd3 is favorable for black since that possibility is eliminated.
the reason you mentioned (the misplaced knight on a6 ) is exactly one of the reasons the owen's french has some advantages. You virtually never get to play ba6 in a way that ends up with the knight on a6. (the one major exception is one line where you go for bd3, nf3, nd2, without qe2 in which case ba6 right away its fine). in the Owen's if you do play for ba6 its under the favorable support of a5, qc8, or both depending on how white plays.
5.e5 and 5.exd5 in the nakamura line are NOT equally grim. for example, 5.e5, for stockfish 17.1 NNUE at depth 44 is a very respectable 0.5 eval after 5...qd7. 5. exd5 at similar depth is about 0.7 but the major reason its much worse than a mere 0.2 difference is the ease of play for white in the latter. Any decent master can immediately find the ideal course of play for white in the exd5 line, which is to castle, re1, c4, nc3, and either bf4 or bg5 always eyeing for d4-d5. This leads to a difficult position where black is almost in a zugswang lite. By comparison, the e5 line, black has a lot of flexibility on how to approach his oyster, some slightly better than others (h5 or h6, to delay or not to delay c5, a5 or no a5? castle 0-0 , 0-0-0, or king walk to the queenside, f6 or no f6?) , but makes deep preparation agaisnt it more difficult.

other than a premature engine eval of +1 which fizzles out at higher depth, i have failed to see how the line is considerably worse (emphasis on considerably, i think the slow nature of black's pawn makes equalizing take longer). If it doesnt play like a french why call it one? for example, the main way to play these lines involve a massive queenside pawnstorm, c4-c5, b4-b5, a5, b5, whereas the relatively common cxd4 common in normal french is never played in the owen's unless nb4 can be landed favorably. 
I have never advocated for the czech pirc , idk who you confusing me with, in fact, im the one complaining in czech forums that i fail to see any real advantage to it compared to a hanham philidor which is superior ,lands e5 while mostly avoiding the critical f4 lines and doesnt require a misplaced queen. I think the owens is far superior to the czech pirc.

as far as im concerned they are 3 critical lines in the french owens' which to those unfamiliar with the line im describing , is 1.e4 b6 2.d4 bb7 3. bd3 nf6 4.qe2 e6 5.nf3 d5:
A: There is the "lets play it like a normal french line : 6.e5 nfd7 7.c3 c5 8.0-0 nc6 ( i think this is better than be7 first) 9. a3 (this is the critical move, the other moves here give black an easier game unless white transposes). I will discuss it below.

B: the ng5 line. 6.e5 nfd7 7.ng5 where black probably should play qe7. (taking the gambit pawn on h7 is now well known to be pretty decent for black), in which case the most challenging reply is 8. f4 c5 9.c3 nc6 10.nf3 in which my antidote is f5!? here. Yes of course white is better, engine gives it a 0.8, but at least to me its not exactly clear where white's large advantage really lies, black has stopped the most dangerous of white's advances and has kept a very flexible structure . he can try for g5 , castle either side, play for c4-c5 expansion or not ,etc. exactly the clusterF black wants if he is playing this stuff. This is virtually almost never seen since for some reason 8.f4 is only rarely played for some reason but since its now what engines prefer, it may change.
C: the c4 lines, after nfd7 7.c4!? which is thankfully very rare leads to pure pandemonium after dxc4 8.bxc4 c5. 9.0-0 cxd4 10. nxd4 11.Qh4!!? nb5 12.nc6! where black often gets a massive attack in exchange and a pawn for the rook. Some of the lines here even the engine struggles to evaluate for example 12.nc6 nc7+ 13. kd8 Nxa8 14. nxe5 15. bb5 16. nf3! 17.gxf3 bd6. Its a headache how much black has to memorize here but in truth , he should be much better equipped in these ultra sharp complications than white since its his opening so entering this chaos can be in your favor. 
Actually, if lines B and C prove scary, black can try to get the french owens via, the 3.e6 move order, where instead of playing the miles way of playing the owen's with c5, nf6, nc6, na5 and c4, black plays for d5 instead of na5 transposing to lines A. The hair in the soup and the reason i dont do this is because 3.bd3 e6 4.nf3 c5 5.d5! is critical . Dont let the engine eval fool you, the pawn sac is very unpleasant for black, one of the authorities on the queen Flank IM oddessky has given intensive analysis on it and basically, black prob survives but barely and clearly worse, white gets all the fun.

which leads us back to line A. Engine actually thinks black is not too bad, about 0.6, but recommends 9...be7. i prefer 9...c4, bc2 , h6!? which i have a lot of notes on, although some would prefer 10...be7 instead (i can discuss these if someone asks ). if black plays 9...be7 and white plays without the difficult 10.b4, he gets a fine game going for either 10...a5 10...c4 or the exciting 10...g5!? depending on taste.
10.b4 is the critical question if you follow the engine. the engine recommends 10...c4 11.bc2 b5 and after 12. a4, you have bxa4, which on a practical level i dont like after 13.b5! na5 14. Rxa4 a6. I find white's play is simply much easier. 12. a4 a5!? is very interesting, as after 13.axb5 nxb5 leads to two connected passers and a pawn (plus a second one that will fall soon) for a knight. Very unclear and i dont trust it but not a bad sideline on a must win game.. But if you really want to play this chaos, i think 10.h6!? first, then 11. c4 and the rest is better, same eval more or less but no shenanigans on the g5 square. If you dont like my suggestion for 9.c4 to avoid b4 and play into 10.b4, i instead recommend 10...a6!? ,the point being 11.be3 c4 12. bc2 b5 13.a4 bxa4 14.rxa4 nb6 15.ra2 16. kd7!? where despite the engine not liking the position , white really struggles to find a coherent plan. whereas black will play na7-nb5, and prepare a well timed break on the kingside. the b4 and c3 pawns are constant targets for a well timed sac too. White really has to think twice about f4-f5, h4 plans here because he can end up with a bare kingside for blacks rooks and queen to exploit.

The bulk of my notes on line A are after 9...c4, where black expands on the queenside, its a lot of lines analyzed, some till like move 20-25 so i wont go that rabbit hole unless requested.