In Wojo's Weapons: Winning With White (Volume 1) by Jonathan Hilton and Dean Ippolito, it is written:
Wojo's move order to reach any opening position almost always started with 1. Nf3 and then either c2-c4 or d2-d4. When asked why he didn't play 1. d4 as his first move instead, he was occasionally known to say, "I'm too lazy!"
I don't really understand why he says that.
If I am not wrong, if you want to play c4, d4, Nf3, g3, (not against everything, but against most defenses), then the difference between starting with 1. Nf3 and starting with 1. d4, is that starting with 1. Nf3 avoids all of these openings:
- The Budapest Gambit
- The Albin Countergambit
- The Benko Gambit
- The main lines of the Grunfeld (I think)
- The Benoni
- The Nimzovich Variation (Exaggerated Fianchetto) of the QID
At the price of allowing Black to play the English.
Technically starting with 1. d4 also allows White to play these three variations:
- The Samisch against the KID
- The 4-Pawns Attack against the KID
- The Exchange Variation against the QGD
But since White is going to also play Nf3 anyway (on move 3), he is not going to play any of those variations.
So if we intend to play c4, Nf3, d4, g3, I would believe that choosing to start with 1. Nf3 is the most intelligent choice since it avoids so much openings at the (small) price of allowing Black to play the English.
But this isn't laziness. It's just cleverness, it's the wise choice to make. So I still don't understand Wojo's quote.
So what did I miss? Does starting with 1. d4 avoids other openings that 1. Nf3 allows? Are there other advantages of starting with 1. d4 ?