Why is the english opening unpopular?

At least relative to 1.e4 and 1.d4 it is rather infrequently played.  I'm wondering if there is a reason for this?

It's not really true. For example, in the recent Isle of Man Masters tournament, it takes the 2nd place in my current count :

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/isle-of-man-masters-openings-2018-10-31

It really isn't unpopular. However, amateur players play it less often because of a greater concern with direct plans than move order subtleties. Hence, the real question is what are the reasons anyone would play 1.c4? Here are the main reasons in my opinion:

Avoiding the Slav and Semi-Slav defenses.

It's tricky to gain anything in the opening against these lines played well, so one of the main ideas behind 1.c4 is to dodge to the Panov-Botvinnik Attack or some other anti-Slav line:

Another reason (more common at the grandmaster level than at lower levels) is to avoid the Grunfeld Defense:

This is avoided in the following way:

The third reason (and perhaps the most relevant for amateur players) is to be able to favourably reach the Catalan Opening while avoiding certain attempts by black to discourage it:

As you could imagine, there are not many 1550 rated players who are thinking about these things in choosing their openings, hence they rarely play the English Opening.

I wasn't really thinking about my own games, rather looking at the database of master games on chess.com where there are 153,000 games with the english opening, 950,000 with e4 and 752,000 with d4.  Although it's definitely less frequent at my level, I've seen it 4 times on chess.com compared with 160 times for e4 and I don't think once yet otb.

But anyways, so c4 is primarily played just to get a d4 opening while avoiding certain openings (the slav and grunfeld) that they don't want to play?  People don't play the english for the english opening?

English is not unpopular but what do u expect?

It is normal that 1.e4 and 1.d4 are more played : they are universal moves, developing, easier to understand, and many other reasons.

The reason the 'pure English' is not so common is that it's a bit tricky to make a repertoire based around it that is both consistent and poses black real threats, which is not the case for 1.e4 and 1.d4. An English Opening specialist can do it, but so can someone who specialises in 1.b3, which is also not so common. If you play the English Opening just for the sake of the opening, you are likely to end up in a structure with a pawn on d3- if this suits you, then that is fine, but most people would set their sights on the d4 square, which can be occupied immediately after 1.d4, or later after 1.e4 or 1.c4.

black may answer c7-c5, e7-e5 with immediate fight to control d4,

also with pawn on d4 or e4 white is now able to develop at three pieces (N,N,B) and with c4 only two (N,N), so maybe here rests why "we" normally do e4,d4. if e4, with next two natural move white is ready for 0-0.

The idea to reach a better version of some d4. openings is sometimes done with the English however, it allows e5... Therefore I sometimes play Nf3 with the same idea.

That's generally my thought on playing the english as well.  I'm playing in the class E division at my state's tournament this weekend and I figure people won't have prepared for it, so I figure I don't really need to spend any time learning any theory for the potential lines against e4 or d4.

Since Carlsen has played it twice now it will probably become more popular, especially if he eventually wins with it.

I think it was the 2016 Candidates when lots of English were played, wasn't it?

I think it's true.

English has been used since ages in world championshio...

That didn't lead to a popularity for it.

For instance, the famous last game from Sevilla wch, where Kasparov had to win, using the english...

English is a totally sound opening. But I play 1.e4 because it is more trappy and tactical.

Playing an opening because it is "trappy" is terrible.  If the opening is sound and it happens to have traps involved with it fine but you don't play that opening purley for the traps.

I don't play for traps in the sense of making bad moves hoping for a particular response. I play normal developing moves and because the game is open and many pieces are developed early there are so many tactics in the air.

Is that really wrong?

I mean look at the Sicilian Najdorf Bg5 main line or the French Winawer Qg4 Poisoned Pawn variation. Both are highly tactical.

Its unpopular? I'll stick to it as long as it is sound.

Note that trappiness rhymes with happiness which proves this is a good way to play.  I've written a poem:  If you play real trappy  You'll be real happy.

Ah, but what if you play the Fishing Pole variation?

Tell me more about this fortified juice.