Grunfeld vs the English

I'm looking at Yelena Dembo's book about the "anti King's Indians". She wrote it to King's Indian fans and Grunfeld fans alike. She spends two bonus chapters to people who would like to adopt the Grunfeld or the KID vs c4 as well.

However, what if White plays c4 Nc3 and e4 in this order? The book said to play Nf6 and g6 (i.e. not 2.. d5) but after e4 it seems impossible to play d5 any time soon, at least not on the terms we'd like to.

not really grunfeld style play(definitely a kid style flavor).  But, how about a d6, e5, c6 formation and n-h5-f4 ideas or even (if they play g3 preventing n-f4) an idea of b-e7,n-g7, f5 etc.  Don't know any of the theory. But, this looks like an interesting set up (which might possibly be a bad plan or simply refuted somehow.  But, if you are going to lose at least lose in an interesting manner ;D) 

Now you have to play the king's indian.  I've played people who play the gruenfeld and when I use this move order they are almost always out of book.  The KID is perfectly playable.  And that seems like the only way to play this.  Perhaps you can make it into a ol' markozy bind, with c5

but you can't really play a Gruenfeld structure out of this.  

Gambit something.  It just might work

 Is that really that big a deal?  After 3. e5 4. d4, exd 5. qxd, n-c6 can white really gain an opening advantage? 

After 3.e5, n-f3  can black not play a sort of old indian defense with d6, nb-d7 and c6 

While we're at it, if I decide to learn something do you think I should learn c5 or e5? Which one is easier to learn? I heard that the Symmetric can get into very dull positions but that's not a problem for me at this stage of my chess, I don't mind drawing with black.

chess is much purer without the queens and with no pawn majorities:)

I got it! play 1. f5 and stop all this nonsense

Petrosjan, is that you? ;)

After e4, you can play e5 or d6(with e5 or c5 following up in the future).

Its basically a forced King's Indian or if you want to transpose, a Dragon.

I'd go for the KID since I don't like to play against the Marocy.

I've seen this in my english book, and as a former d4 player facing all the counteropenings and lacking time to study them in, I traded my repertoir gradually to c4. So I can transpose c4 to d4 openings at any time whenever my opponent always plays the same moves/opening choice (in this particular case the grunfeld) . Having these 3 moves/move order at hand is usefull, I recently detected it as well.The 3 moves mentionned calls the grundfeld english, though it transposes to a KID or Sicilian (Dragon if the bishop is fianchettoed) and the e4,c4,Nc3 setup in the sicilian is called the Marocszy setup. To me the grunfeld is the soundest opening against d4 (much more then the KID, QID) . The most aggressive by far is the Nimzo Indian, which is the reason I'm leaving the d4,c4 move order and play english or the english/retie move order. Gradually I'm learning to understand some move orders and how they aid in avoiding openings/variations your opponent plays (provided you know what he plays). Objectively speaking you have no gain in avoiding something over the board, but it bothers your opponents prospects in the game.Thats why GMs kind of think over the board before their first move (if they didn't consdider it in prior already) like Kasparov did many times.

There is still a way to keep your grunfeld options open, trading in the 2nd move g6 for d5 ! the only line of any independance (besides d4 & g6) is here cxd5, where we enter the pseudo Grünfeld !

Korchnoi and Kramnik almost never play against the Grunfeld by using the move order posted here. Black can still play in a style similar to the Grunfeld, but it's not a true Grunfeld. 

Unless you play d5 immediately on the second move, they can transpose the game into a Sicilian Dragon or King's Indian with e4.