Reti Opening: 1.Nf3: Is it good?


I myself always play 1.e4 (best by test) but I have played 1.Nf3 in the past. It's a flexible move for sure, allowing many transpositions. In my games it always lead to a more strategic game where understanding was more important than just knowing opening theory. If your interested in playing it you should check out the games of Tigran Petrosian, I believe he played 1.Nf3 a few times.
“If you believe as I do (and some elite GMs) that 1…e5 and the Grünfeld are the best answers to 1.e4 and 1.d4, then it follows from the above that White’s optimum opening play, if he prefers the Anti-Grünfeld to the real one, might be 1.♘f3 d5 2.d4 or 1…♘f6 2.c4 or 1…g6 2.e4 or 1…c5 2.e4. But very few players are equally at home on the white side of the Sicilian, the Queen’s Gambit, the Queen’s Indian, and the Symmetrical English! If you are one of them, then play 1.Nf3...”
Excerpt From: Larry Kaufmann. “Kaufman's New Repertoire for Black and White.”

Unless you play 2.c4 the reti will transpose into other openings. Your opponents will know this and try and get some well known d4 openings for them. Most players will play 1...Nf6 hoping for d4. Reti players will need to know theory beyond the first 4 moves. If you play g3 you will have a benko opening (which to be fair, not too many players know as black).
Botvinnik used to play Reti as white, some of very interesting games in , think, 50s.
one of main thing is that if you want to play 'real' Reti, you should delay moving king or queen pawn unless this move(s) are required or would do some great change in position. Playing d4 in very early phase mostly will transpose to some known 1.d4 openings.
I love this opening, as most players as black are immediately thrown off. Then, I can easily get my King's Indian attack, and they simply crumble.

And I’ve just never been a fan of 1. d4 either. Just not fun to me personally.