Solid Repertoire For Beginners Against 1. d4 (Black)?

Hi, I’m mostly a beginner (rated ~900 rapid), but I like to have prepared a solid and simple repertoire for my openings. I usually play 1. d4 into the London for white, since it is pretty simple, I know the basic ideas of the opening, and it gets me into a playable middle-end game.

For black, I like playing the French against 1. e4, but have struggled to find something that fits me against 1. d4. I know there are things like the QGD/Slav/Semi-Slav against the QG (I usually play one of the three, though I feel like the Slav/Semi-Slav is much more simple in terms of development and middle-end game play), but I rarely, if ever, face the Queen’s Gambit in my games.

What would be a solid and simple opening against all 1. d4 openings (QG, London, etc.)? I have experimented with the Dutch and King’s Indian Defense a bit, but I feel like they aren’t really my style and also feel a bit complicated/risky for my level. I was also thinking maybe a going for a Queen’s Indian or Nimzo Indian route, though I have heard that they are also a bit complicated and can only be played against certain setups. Whenever I try to just play basic opening principles, my opponent usually gains the advantage and makes the position much more difficult to equalize and gain and actual advantage for black. It helps to have some solid ideas to base my openings on for me.

The only thing I could think of that might fit my style would be the Horwitz Defense (1. d4, e6; similar to the French which I play against 1. e4), which can transpose into the French, QGD, or other. Though I have not played it in my games because it seems a bit sketchy, especially against openings such as the London where you don’t immediately put 2 pawns straight in the center. What opening against all 1. d4 setups might be good for me and that I can/should try out?

Thanks.

(Edit: For context, I came back to chess after stopping for a few years, and it's been a few months since I returned to this game. I also sometimes like to test some openings against bots to see generally how games might go using them.)

If you're 900 you should probably be playing d4 d5 and e4 e5

I know, but I like having an opening where I can control where the game goes better and have a clearer idea of how to develop and the plans for both sides (and also maybe pull my opponent into unfamiliar territory and me into familiar territory). That's why I was asking what opening I should play to have a solid idea of where to go in the opening-middle game.

"Whenever I try to just play basic opening principles, my opponent usually gains the advantage and makes the position much more difficult to equalize and gain and actual advantage for black. It helps to have some solid ideas to base my openings on for me."

Edit: I also like learning just some basic openings so that I could just not worry about the openings for some time too much and focus more on middle-end game ideas.

Really?

you shouldn't just learn just Queens Indian or Nimzo against everything d4, they're not system openings. i'd recommend learning one defense for the d4 c4 openings (Nimzo or Queens Indian, Grunfeld, etc.). If you want to play d5 instead of nf6, I like the Slav (Know when to take the pawn and how to reinforce your pawn after), or if you want to play Queens Gambit Declined, i really like the Cambridge Springs defense (But I almost never get it). But i would say pick nf6 or d5 and then an opening or two that branches from that

but i dont think you're going to be able to just stick to one Defense if you don't like Kings Indian, or dutch, there's a lot of openings in d4 that people can play (Catalan, QG, Blackmar Diemer Gambit, etc etc)

The Tarrasch might actually be to sound and playable! So why would any beginner actually learn a career opening when they can play the Horwitz Defence which can transpose into the QGD (or the Tarrasch Defence) but requires implementing basic opening principles. And I think it might reach into the complicated area ... I wonder why chess is complicated? 

The Macho Grob has very little theory!

Here's a basic resource you might find useful.  Not too deep but it recommends the French against 1.e4 and the Tarrasch as the main 1.d4 defense(while also providing guidance against non-Queen's Gambit openings like the Colle and London.) It also includes a couple of other QGD defense options (Tartakower and Stonewall Dutch.) Don't spend much too effort on memorization but try to understand the concepts. Don't get so bogged down with learning openings that it hinders you learning chess.

https://exeterchessclub.org.uk/chessx/pdf/JuniorRepertoire.pdf

Very well explained. Thank you!

Thanks! I'll look into the Tarrasch.

I'm not sure what you mean by a, "career opening," but thanks for the info!

Thanks! I'll take a look.

Thank you for the resource! I'll check it out.

Are we referring to the same Tarrasch Defense?

Here are two games from the 1984 World Championship match between Karpov and Kasparov. Up until this point, Kasparov used the Tarrasch Defense to much success. However, after losing to Karpov with the problems from the isolated Black d-pawn, it seems Kasparov has given up the opening. This makes a good case to believe that the Tarrasch Defense might not be Black's best option available to them.

Waiting for the guy that will say beginners should just learn the princibles

Hi!! I'm a certified chess coach and can help you!

First step is to develop your pieces. You will then be able to beat grandmasters

Great question, OP! I’m sort of struggling with the same question.

Like you, I’ve rediscovered chess after a long period of absence. The meta game had changed and it felt like a perfect opportunity to re-program myself. For white I chose the London system and I love it. It provides a great structure and is versatile. I can grab wins with a sudden tactical attack on the queenside or, after castling queenside go for all sort of kingside attacks. For black I chose to learn the Caro-Kann as the main response to 1.e4.  Where in London, because of the setup and playing as white, it’s rather difficult to blunder, playing  Caro-Kann was a more challenging journey. As the reactive player, black, requires a lot more opening knowledge.

Which posed the question what to do about 1.d4 as black?  

I chose the Englund gambit. Why? First of all, I didn’t want another ‘system’ or ‘family of openings’. I’m investing a lot of time on studying London and Caro-Kann (and all variations!), I didn’t want to add another rabbit hole to my chess homework. In the Englund (main line with 3. …Qe7) you only need to know just a handful of lines and you’re good to go. Possible outcomes: A decent amount of your games (especially at your level) will just be instant wins. Occasionally, you will face a player that knows the opening and you will lose. The rest is open for the taking. What I like about this opening is that even when your opponent doesn’t fall for the trap, which is most of the time, his advantage is only +1 or +2. With his structure and plans completely destroyed, there is a game to be played in a position unfamiliar to both.

In summary: No need to study, just 10-20% instant wins and 80% of games without preparation for both, just a game to be played on instinct and tactics.

Just to be  clear, I’m sharing my own experience. Englund Gambit is not a viable option at the higher rating levels, that’s why I’m looking into alternatives. It is still winning for me, at 1400 rapid, though it probably shouldn’t. Take this a suggestion, not a recommendation.

^just some advice for you if you plan on playing in competitions and stuff like that you might see a lot of people transpose into a Scotch or a Danish Gambit like this:

Englund might not be as isolated as you think

Hm... The Englund looks interesting, but it tends to have not so great of a reputation of being unsound. Especially in rapid games, where your opponent gets to think a lot more and make less mindless choices, the Englund might not be for me. I will take a look at it though. Thanks for the suggestion!