From Fischer's point of view, 1. b4 was a simul special. He wouldn't play it against anyone decent, but it was a way of getting a relatively easy life against much lower graded players. He wouldn't have to worry about them springing a nasty opening surprise against him.

Positionally, 1. b4 has some things going for it. It leaves black a free hand to develop in the centre, which means that white can play a black opening with the extra move b4 in hand. White might end up playing the black side of a french, for example, with part of his queenside expansion already started.

1. b4 also asks some moderately interesting questions of the black Nb8 and c pawn. If black plays the natural Nc6, then b5 is annoying. If c5 then white plays bxc5 and argues that he has swapped a relatively unimportant b pawn for a c pawn that might otherwise have challenged for the centre. And if black avoids both Nc6 and c5 he could be compromising his position.

We're also probing the kingside. Black would like to play Bxb4 but has to be alert for Bxg7 in reply. So black has to take a little care developing his kingside. Okay, so it's not exactly brain surgery but it's something for black to think about.

The b pawn is vulnerable, but we don't need to be too worried about that. Park a rook on b1 and we've got a half open file to play with.

And if black ignores b4, we're going to play a4, b5, c4 and our plans for world domination are at hand.

Does that mean we should all start playing 1. b4? Almost certainly not. It doesn't challenge for the centre and only develops a couple of pieces.

But it probably isn't quite as bad as its reputation suggests.

The attacking formation with bishops on b2 and d3, queen on c2, knights on f3 and d2, and the king either on the queenside or in the center can be quite dangerous.

Positionally, it is to some extent cognate with the Grob: White exerts pressure against e5 with the fianchetto, and Black can't defend the square with the natural ...Nc6 because b5 is in the offing, and if the knight moves to d4, White hits it with e3, driving it to a worse square since it can't take on b5, and possibly even winning a pawn on e5.

Neither have I (as Black), although admittedly I've only encountered 1.b4 in blitz/rapid.

Aside from the mainline with c4, Nf3, e3 I've had good success with 4, Nc3!?, Nc6; 5. Bf6:, Qf6:, 6. Nd5.

Ultimately of course black can equalize in a number of ways in the Polish but I like that white has some control on how to steer the game - positional or tactical. Also, its a bit deeper than it looks so a defender who takes it too lightly can get burnt quickly. I've gotten some terrific Q-side binds in 12-15 moves.

I enjoy the resulting positions and feel very comfortable that I can hold my own against stronger players, also. I've always felt amateurs should play lines they enjoy and feel good about as opposed to trying to find best moves and squeeze a small opening advantage that will promptly disappear with the first middle game inaccuracy.

The best introductory book on it is Lapshun's tome published a few years ago. Levy's is also good - an English translation of Sokolsky's book with some updates. Marek's 'b4' database is awesome, also.

Here's an example of my 'pet' line mentioned above.

[Event "Open invite"]
[Site "http://www.redhotpawn.com"]
[Date "2012.02.26"]
[EndDate "2012.03.11"]
[Round "?"]
[White "ParisAttack"]
[Black "Mike P"]
[WhiteRating "2111"]
[BlackRating "2148"]
[WhiteElo "2111"]
[BlackElo "2148"]
[Result "1-0"]

As I said, I prefer to get an equal middle game that I at least fancy I understand (and like) as opposed to trying to milk a small opening advantage.

If setting problems for your opponents is a goal, the Polish isn't a good choice. But sometimes if you give them enough rope, they will hang themselves. :)

(fortunately)>

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0061735/

I'd recommend the movie, not sure about the pun!