It's strange that you reference the ekeblad, granovetter, and rubin structure as evidence that your opening structure is good when you're actually changing that opening structure heh. It is also strange you don't want to use a natural 2N if you have no other use in mind for 2N. I could see giving it up if you thought there was something very beneficial you could play, but if you don't have anything in mind then giving it up then why don't you use the same thing that ekeblad, granovetter, and rubin use playing your same structure.