Defending kingside attacks in the sicillian

#10 You cannot blame white for avoiding a variation that is fun for black...

g5 in the bg5 lines is usually just a pawn sacrifice to get the e5 square for your knight

#6 Could you contrast a counter intuitive move with the alternate counter intuitive move, within one example?
Perhaps mention an example of intuitive rationale behind the wrong move, trap, or lesser move, in contrast to the book move in same position that would counter some intuitions? I have been looking for such conflicting positions...likening them to the concept of trap. so that would be nice to chew on.

Is the only way to know the counter-intuitive move to have the book in mind. or can some positional analysis arguments favor the counter intuitive move of the non opening theory educated player. or is the counter-intuitive move better by pure combinatorial outcome, invisible to both uneducated intuitive playing and positional analysis. something beyond just referring to the opening book (there should be rationales behind the opening theory lines, perhaps even for the counter-intuitive ones). within the op context, if you had one in mind. thanks.

Remember that in the English attack, after white plays g4 and g5 you have to play b5, b4 straight away to get a counter-attack. After b4, if white plays Na4 then play Nh5 rather than Ne8 as this holds white's kingside attack at bay.