Why Do So Many 1.D4 Players Hate Facing the Benoni Defense?

It's because black can keep pushing for something in the game, whether or not black is equal, worse or better in the game. Like the King's Indian, it is also not that easy for white to simplify the position.

Probably because d4 players prefer a positional type of game while the Benoni forces them into a more tactical type of game.

Because I've played against the benoni so few times that when someone does play against me I dont know what to do.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The Benoni pawn structures are well known for being the most difficult in the timing of the critical pawn breaks at the outset of the middle  game, in other words the pawn capture that signals  the first move in the plan of attack in the middle game.  There is  always a danger of being too early or  too late in the execution of pertinent pawn break.  Timing the pawn break is extremely complicated.

Some famous Modern Benoni players as Black include: Tal, Fischer, Kasparov, and Topalov. They all played Black as a counter-attacking platform, and the Modern Benoni suited their style well. Nobody likes to be attacked, and the Modern Benoni isn't refuted. It's hard to gain an edge against a well-prepared opponent. 

I love facing the Benoni Defense! The benoni is a bad defense, and it is easy to beat!

Tension

Right. That's why the players I mentioned in post #7 played it.

It could be easy for him to play the White side and he may have very good results against it!

Many players have biases for one side or the other because maybe they better understand the ideas for one side over the other.  I'm no different, and nor is any other amateur that is below the IM level.

Take Sokolov.  He wrote a book on the 4.e3 Nimzo-Indian maybe 5 or 6 years ago for New In Chess (light blue cover book).  He says in the introduction himself that he has written the book from an objective standpoint, but that he personally prefers the White side of the Nimzo-Indian.  So even GMs have preferences and biases.

For me, give me a French or King's Indian from either side all day and twice on Sunday.  But you start talking other QP openings, and you'll see a fairly biased opinion by me:

Queen's Gambit Declined - I don't see a theoretical preference for either side, but from a psychological standpoint, I'd much rather be White here!

Benoni, Grunfeld, Benko, or QGA - Give me White!

Nimzo-Indian, Classical and Stonewall Dutch - Give me Black.  I avoid both as White as I play the Catalan (3.g3) against 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 and I avoid the Stonewall Dutch via 1.d4 f5 2.Bg5 or 1.d4 e6 2.e4 (remember I said, give me a French or King's Indian from either side).

The main thing to realize is that just because your personal results are better than the stats suggest does not mean that said opening or defense is refuted.

Right on!

its not a good set up but it does succeed in taking d4 players (usually positional players) out of there element and into sharper waters. And as you said its considered not as good as other defenses to  1.d4 thus its less studied and is a good surprise weapon.

Didn't know the idea that many D4 players would hate Benoni. I have played quite a few Benoni games as black. Started explore that opening a few years ago in order to try out something new. Before that I liked Kings Indian and sometimes 1... c6 inviting white to play Caro-Kann.

I haven't really put any focus on whether Benoni is more or less tactical than other answers to D4. My take on chess is something like this: Always look for tactics no matter what opening you play along being alert to the position and positional matters.

That's a good point.  

I like playing against the Benoni as I have good results against it.

Unless it's the Benko gambit, then I just don't know what to do.

Personally, it's all about mood. I play the f4 variations against the Benoni and fight like crazy to close the Q side and get a passed pawn in the center. It's a pretty taxing way to play, and small mistakes cost big advantages. Same with the KID, I play the Samisch and attack on the kingside, so I have a decent plan going into these positions, but - if I'm not in the fighting mood - it's pretty easy to play some passive idea and get crushed.

At the same time, I don't think the slow approaches by white are particularly challenging to either the Benoni or the KID, so I feel obligated to play something sharp, and - sometimes - you just wake up calculating everything wrong. On those days, I pray not to be stuck in a Benoni.

I'm not a huge believer in 1.d4 c6 - if you want to play the Slav just play the Slav!? There aren't any move order benefits that I know of, and there is a drawback, namely that white can force you to play into something like this:

Surely black players would be happier playing something like this, which by the way is a transposition to the Exchange Caro-Kann anyway:

So I simply don't understand the motivation behind 1.d4 c6.

1.d4 c6 can lead to Gurgenidze lines as well as Slav lines for Black.

One excellent reason to play Modern Benoni lines as Black is to reach middlegame positions that are similar to closed Spanish lines. This is how Topalov and others have interpreted it.

The benko probably is easy to deal with. I'm just to lazy to learn how.

I play the Benoni, I also play 1 d4. The Benoni (especially at the club level) is just fine. I've played it almost exclusively since the 90s and always reach decent positions. If Black knows what's going on he should be fine.