I was taught early in my playing that you don't move pawns if you don't have to, and that moving the rook pawn in particular weakens the position because of the knight 3 square and the fact that you don't want to keep your bishop pawn out of play. Moreover, it opens you up to a knight pawn attack at g5, etc., though it seems like your opponent has to weaken his/her side a lot more just to conduct the attack.
So many players at all levels routinely play the pawn when the opposing bishop has the knight in a pin, and so rarely does it lead to anything other than pushing the bishop to h4 or the equivalent. Unless you intend to follow up with g5 or equivalent, which then REALLY weakens your position, is there really a point to that?
Well, I've had very few games where I pay a penalty for playing h3, etc. I almost never face a knight on f5 where I can't play g6 for fear of losing the h pawn. And in fact, in more than a few games the h3 or equivalent pawn position has kept my opponents minor pieces in check, particularly the knights. So I wonder if it's worth playing h3 against a bishop pin just to make the move with a tempo.
Any general thoughts?