“That which one has the right to do, it is not always expedient to do.” Edmund Burke
And a flat game it was indeed.
Starting with 1. g3 often offers the “right” to transpose to Queen Pawn lines, for instance, the King’s Indian Fianchetto as in the present game. But it’s not always expedient: if that was what I wanted, why not just play 1. d4?
In any case, I found myself in a boring, well-known position and quickly went wrong out of lack of interest in what I’d lamely constructed on the board in place of the work of art I had anticipated (9. d5?! instead of 9. Qc2 with the idea of 9… exd4 10. Nxd4 Re8 11. Rd1).
There is a class of positions in which White and Black face off without direct contact and s/he who lunges may be lost. Classical theory suggests that when White is reticent Black can go over to the attack, but my experience suggests there can exist a dynamic standoff.
These positions are interesting because the “aggressive” openings have already been mined so deeply. There’s still room for individual creativity in the “passive-aggressive” openings of the type I’m describing because they have not been popular. Furthermore, the chess engines I’ve used tend to evaluate and play these positions poorly.