Openings with the least amount of theory

what openings have the least amount of theory in response to 1 e4 and 1 d4

I would bet that the theory is pretty slim on the 1.. a6 response to 1 e4 and the 1.. h6 response to 1 d4.

Either one could really use a Kummatmebro line.

Do you want the least theory? Or the least theory for something decent?

Hi Kummatmebro--one way to answer this question is to list the popular openings and then consider everything else.  For the "main" responses to 1. e4 you have the French, Sicilian, Caro-Kann, Alekhine's, Modern/Pirc, Scandinavian, and 1...e5.  So that leaves 1...Nc6 which is playable, 1...b6 which is offbeat but not bad, and from there it steadily goes downhill.

Doing the same with 1. d4, you have the Indian defenses, Grunfeld, Dutch, Benoni, 1...d5, and transpositional moves like e6/c6/g6.  Again 1...b6 is playable but not outstanding, 1...Nc6 is much the same, and anything beyond that is risky.

So perhaps take a look at one of those moves, or a forceful thrust like the Scandinavian/Old Benoni.  These typically limit white's options.  Openings with "system" in the name tend to be one-size-fits all, making them easier to play as well; the Hedgehog formation is one example for black.  You could also choose a versatile move one response that works against anything; g6, e6, d6, and c6 all seem like good candidates.

With 1. d4, 1. Nf3 or 1. c4, transpositions to various openings are common, you will probably have to work with some theory so that you can choose what opening you want to play.

There is an opening called the sniper, works against almost any opening, is g6, Bg7, Nf6 improvise

KIA= Killed in Action or Kings Indian Defence.

well, i guess im never asking questions again on this forum

thanks to those that actually answered the question.

im currently playing french, but i dont like the cramped positions or the trapped LSB. i guess ill play caro then. 

I have to admit I had completely overlooked those lines.  If someone really wants to have an opening system flexible enough to play against e4 or d4 that doesn't require a lot of study, there's little need to look any further.

Still, I checked out Chessbase's online database and found that the line had only a 90% success rate--I'm not kidding-- so there may be a little more theory to grapple with than one might think.

The Mystery of chess solved..... it just took till March of 2014 by a guy named harryz.  The Harryz System.

Why not buckle down and learn a little theory? It can be pretty rewarding... Of course, it will be all for naught if you have some tactical oversight. 

There is a book by GM Soltis, "Black Defensive System For the Rest of Your Career". He suggests a Caro/Slav type of system where you basically play d5 and c6 as the first two moves (usually either 1. e4 c6, or else 1...d5 against anything else). Then you just develop naturally, Bf5 or Bg4 and trade off this  bishop if needed, Nf6, pawns at e6 and c6, trade off the d5 pawn if needed, Be7 or Bd6, Nd7, O-O, Qe7 or Qc7, then decide on a plan based on what white has done. A lot of times c5 is the plan, then opening the c-file, and piling up rooks on the c-file. Usually if the c-pawn gets removed I will keep the c8 bishop inside the pawn chain. I found that when I moved it outside the pawn chain (ex. Bf5, e6) then white could get some annoying play on the queenside (ex. Bb5, pinning the knight, etc). So if white tries that I just trade off the bishop. This system also plays similar to a reverse London system, so you can play something similar as white if you need. It's not the best thing around, but it gets you past the opening without getting killed, which is close to all you want as black anyway.

because i was told by a 2300+ uscf player that playing an opening with as little as theory as possible is what he did to go from 1000-1900, and only then did he start studying theory.

Yes, I think it's better to play by general opening principles rather than use a simple low-theory system. You can always learn whatever line gave you trouble, AND the great benefit is that you will never forget it after you have struggled with it and then learned the right way. Do that until you get close to 2000 and you will be much better off.

Even openings with big bodies of theory don't have to be overwhelming, if you choose simplifying lines within them.

The French has some of the deepest, richest, sharpest positions in all of chess.  But if you focus on the Rubinstein lines, you can both cut out most of them, and find your way to easy-to-understand middlegames in most lines with little difficulty.

Similarly, the QGD has pathways to fairly simple middlegames available against most white replies.  They're not always the theoretical best lines, but they're solid.  Look into the Orthodox.  Once you know your way around a couple trappy lines, you can play your way to a solid but dependable middle game against almost anything following 1.d4, 1.Nf3, or 1.c4.

Opening theory for a 2300+ player is something like Chess Informant, buying opening databases, subscribing to sites like www.chesspublishing.com, etc.

For the rest of us, theory is figuring out what we openings we want to play, if I play 1. e4 and black goes 1...c5, I feel I should at least know what my next couple of moves will be, instead of figuring out over the board what I should play.

The Modern Defense and the Hippo probably have the smallest amount of theory.

Just a few hundred pages, and the fewest books in print.  Very Simple.

But you must like to play DEFENSE, and be willing to give white a big center.

possibly the english as well because you just have to follow the idea of controlling the light squares.

Why would you bump a thread almost 3 years old when the OP had his account closed?  

You probably don't want openings with minimal theory, since those lines tend to be bad. What you want are openings where pretty much any normal-looking move is going to give you an okay position.

If you get to a position where you have lots of candidate moves and all of them are basically okay, then there's no reason why you'd need to know all the theory, even if GMs have worked it all out in excruciating detail. Just avoid super-sharp tactical lines and you can do fine by just following general opening principles.