i would like ppl opinion on wat would be a good reply against e4 and d4 openings as black, and plz tell me the idea behind the opening so i can pick the right one for me

{adale}

Eh... that's like telling someone what job he should get in 30 years. Can you be a little more specific?

What are you looking for in your defenses? Solidity? Aggression? Counterpunching? Should it be main line theory? Something a little off-beat? Are you just starting out or have you been playing for a long time?

You should realize there are a ton of openings under 1. e4 and 1. d4, many of which will require you to know a response. I would recommend 1. e4 e5 and 1. d4 Nf6 to anyone without knowing anything about them, but these moves in themselves do not saying anything about the resulting game. In fact, 1. e4 e5 can end up in an Open Ruy Lopez, a Schliemann Defense, the Two Knights or Italian, a Danish Gambit, a King's Gambit Declined and so many other lines. Black responds symmetrically and stakes a claim in the center, opening the king's bishop diagonal as well as a queen diagonal (which isn't used much), preparing for a quick 0-0.
1. d4 Nf6 has just as much offspring. The Indian defenses are flexible. Black can choose his system which depends mostly on where the pawns and bishops go.

Really though, what kind of analysis would you expect after move 1?

There are lots of good openings, but for beginners, you really should be answering 1.e4 with 1.e5, and 1.d4 with 1.d5.

Play through a lot of master games from the first third of the last century, and you'll start to get ideas about what you want to play.

<Perseus> i like openings like the ruy lopez as white, openings that allow me to attack and keep the pressure on my opponent

Well, there is no way you're going to get Ruy Lopez pressure as black against 1. e4. You'll have to make some concession to get there. Play solidly and carefully outplay white, play a gambit and go for compensation and activity...

1. e4 e5 is good at any level. Defending the Ruy Lopez can be tough, but it's far from impossible.
- The Modern Steinitz (my weapon) offers chances to win the game. You're not giving up pawns, you're setting up solidly (a little off-beat) but aggressive. There are subvariations of course, one being the Siësta variation that took the steam out of 5. c3. There is a system cooked up by Alekhine with f6, g6, Ne7, Bg7, 0-0, (h6), f5 which is sort of King's Indian'ish and there are a few more direct approaches involving Nf3-Bg4 pinning.
- The Schliemann is a little more daring. You're giving up a pawn and possibly, you're messing up your kingside pawnstructure. Activity isn't much of an issue here, you'll get plenty of that.
- I'm not familiar with the Closed Defense. Not the black side at any rate. It hardly ever gives me a really tough time, but some variations are annoyingly positional. I don't mind whatsoever to walk into the Marshall Attack as white. Black (in my case) usually ends up sacrificing some stuff and failing to get something back.


If you want to get pressure going against 1. d4, I wouldn't recommend playing QG territory which arises after 1. d4 d5 2. c4. I would look into the Nimzo-Indian (granted everyone tries to avoid that these days) and possibly the Bogo-Indian or Queen's Indian. I find the indirect pressure adequate.
If you like something a little different, you could try the Grunfeld Defense (1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5), which is pretty good.
However, you're dealing with modern defenses here, indirectly attacking the center.

I think with best play that things peter out into a draw. I started looking for other continuations as black when play petered out into a draw against a 1900 player who was a walking encyclopedia of the opening.

I enjoyed the Marshall attack while I played it but it was another one of those openings that I would willingly play either side of until the analysis got 35 moves deep.

Crash

I'd play the Marshall every single time ... if I thought my opponents would let me. I know that, theoretically, it's probably a draw. But (as many of you know) I don't care that much about theory. I care about practical chances - and those seem to really favor black.

And while I agree with Perseus' point about getting pressure against 1.d4, I don't completely agree with his conclusions. Ignoring the whole issue of the Tarrasch defense, I think that openings like the Nimzo, QID, and Bogo are so closely related to the QGD that you'll find a hard time playing them without understanding the QGD.

I also think that most weaker players will see more decisive games, albiet only by seeing the wrong end of them - by conceding space and/or developmental advantages to white.

While I'm the last person to argue for defending an endless series of exchange QGDs (the devil's opening - white makes you suffer for 40 moves and ends up giving you a draw) there's actually a lot of play in the QGD for average players - not just in the Tarrasch, but in the Tartakower and Cambridge Springs. Heck, the out-of-favor Westphalia is a blast (and has a lot in common with the Nimzo, which sometimes transposes) and while I don't think most people would consider it sound, I highly doubt your opponents will be the slightest bit familiar with it and know the theory to refute it with.

There was a (brief) time I played the QGD. Mostly, I would transpose into some Slav line. Get a nice compact position, counter properly in the center and work from there.

Most QGD variations are a little uncomfortable for me. However, the QGD in general is very reliable. I have some modest experience with the Tarrasch, which I find okay.
Perhaps you're on to something about recommending classical openings to beginners before they taste modern openings. Perhaps, because I started defending 1. e4 with the Alekhine and learned a lot from it.
Also, the argument that you will miss certain themes that spawned from QGD territory when playing Indian defenses isn't entirely accurate in my opinion. I've played the Dutch for a very long time, later switched to QID (among other things). I'm using themes I picked up from the Dutch in the QID, it's just that they actually belong in the QID to begin with.

Can't go wrong with the QGD, but I don't think it's an opening 'for life' so to speak.

Where does the KID rank in terms of defenses for d4? I thought that was THE defense. lol

The KID is one of the best defenses against 1.d4, particularly if you want to play for the win ...

... but not for beginners. And not for intermediates. It's very advanced and if black doesn't know what he's doing - particularly is white makes any number of reasonable-but-unpopular choices - black's going to find himself in a hard way, very quickly.