Originally posted by wittywonkaWell, I use an early bishop fianchett o similar to robatsch.
Owen's Defense (1. e4 b6)
Robatsch Defense (1. e4 g6)
For any of you who have played one or both of these defenses, what is your opinion of either of them? How would you compare/contrast them?
To start off, it is much less efficient if you do 1 e4 g6 ... because 2 e5 bg7 cuts off the bishop immediately.
Against 1 e4 I start 1 d6.
The robatsch is good for undermining center control. I have lost less than 5 times with black on this site using the early fianchetto
The Robatsch Defense (usually called the Modern Defense) is far more popular than the Owen's Defense, which is an excellent argument for playing the Owen's Defense! GM Christian Bauer plays the Owen"s Defense and has published a book about the defense called "Play 1...b6". I've dabbled with both defenses from time to time and I think that the Robatsch is much better. Attacking genuis GM David Norwood played 1...g6 in almost all of his tounament games with Black in the '80s and '90s. Don't know what he is up to these days.
The Modern move order (1...g6) is much more flexible than the Pirc move order (1...d6). Sometimes black wants to play ...c6 and ...d5, which takes up an extra move if Black has already played ...d6. Also, 1...g6 allows Black to steer clear of the very strong Austrian Attack (1 e4 d6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Nc3 g6 4 f4). The avoidance of ...Nf6 often allows Black to get quick counterplay on the a1-h8 diaganol. If Black opens with 1...g6 he can usually transpose into the Pirc if he wants. But if he opens with 1...d6 he's often forced into a Pirc line.