Which defenses to the Lopez should a lowbie consider playing?

I have personally always done well with the breyer variation in the RL and play it most when facing the RL as black. Ofcourse , I was influenced a lot by Spassky's games with it.

 Are you referring to Tiger ther Candy ? 

Wow, thanks for all of the good replies!

Elubis' instincts are spot on, I'm an intermediate player and just getting to the level where I can expect opponents to play book lines for the first while, so I want to be sure that I have an answer to the Lopez that I'm still happy with even if my opponent plays the entire opening correctly.

I've never even looked at the Cozio, so I'll certainly see what it is all about since a couple of you brought it up.What is the basic idea, kingside fianchetto followed by f5 after castling?

The Schliemann is looking very enticing to me now that I found out that Radjabov discovered ways to make it playable even against best play. I was constantly reading about how dubious it was, and so didn't want to go that way and slowly get more and more dissatisfied as I faced opponents who knew how to face it.

I was playing the Marshall, and it proved extremely strong against opponents at my level, but I got the impression that a lot of them didn't even know that it wasn't a blunder on my part by the amount of time they spent thinking about their next move right in the beginning. The reason that I'm moving away from it is that I don't like how the game unfolds in the anti-Marshalls. Sure, they're fine according to theory, but they don't appeal to me. I highly recommend the a4 Marshall to fellow lowbies, play d3 followed by a later d4 and you get that beautiful Lopez setup after all. Costelus, are talking about the anti-Marshall? I don't think that it is quite so desperate as you do, but yeah you aren't really very well placed to bust out and punish white if he dithers.

The Neo-Arkhangelsk seems like it might be promising, despite my getting spanked by Tryst right in the opening when I played it a whirl yesterday. You get a few of those while you learn something new no matter what, especially with blitz games of course. One thing that seemed promising was that the pressure on d4 would result in opponents pushing to d5 when my knight swings kingside a la the King's Indian but with my dark square bishop much better placed. I was thinking about how to face it as white, though, and I realised that Qd3 lets me keep the pawn on d4 while my knight comes out to d2, and also eyes the b-pawn, which is also under attack by a4. I'm much less enthused about it if I can't get the kingside attack going, which seems to be the case, unfortunately.

The Siesta variation looks promising too! On the one hand the dark squared bishop has little scope, but on the other hand the pawn on c3 probably going to be a liability now that the e-pawn is not long for this world, so the classical center isn't going to happen.

I never really considered the Berlin because I am not interested in the queenless middlegames that usually arise, but for a certain kind of player I think that it is a decent option.

I really don't want to play the Breyer, to be honest Reb. It has all of the problems of the closed Lopez I mentioned, and I'm just not prepared to deal with it at my level. I notice that you're a titled player, and that seems to make a huge difference with the Closed Lopez. But for me to select a variation when I'm struggling on defense hoping that eventually I can break out would be an awful decision IMO. I know that with correct play black's game is viable, but it sure as hell doesn't feel like it when I'm staring at the board trying to come up with moves.

The Schliemann might prove to be my favourite from what I see right now with no experience in lots of these suggestions. We'll see. Basically, I want to make a decision and stick with it so I can improve, rather than hop around trying tons of stuff when I start finding I dislike my position. It was disheartening to see the tabiyas of the various defenses in the Easy Guide To The Ruy Lopez at the store and realise that I would rather be white in all of the ones I investigated. This, combined with a dissatisfaction with anti-Marshall positions is what brought all of this on.

Oh, the Gajewski is a Chigorin where you play the gambit move d5 rather than the restraining c5.

I was referring to the Marshall gambit accepted, where I found very difficult for Black to obtain an edge. It's also the amount of theory needed, which you must know very well, and White can easily play an anti-Marshall. Overall, I think that Marshall gambit requires too much work to be useful in practice for me.

Hmm, I found it to be exactly the opposite to be true when white allows the Marshall, Costelus. I found the black pieces very easy to play, and white was the one in constant crisis trying to defend and unravel.

So it looks to me that you obtained the answer to your question: play Marshall attack. Of course, you must be prepared for the anti-Marshalls too, but given that sometimes your opponents will allow the gambit, overall you will obtain good results. I don't know why you are not satisfied with Black's positions after anti-Marshall. Why do you think that Black is better in other lines? You have to accept that Spanish is a very theoretical and positional opening, where White obtains a small advantage. In many cases, it is White who has the initiative and dictates the lines. That's one reason for which people started to play Sicilian. Anyway, just stick with a line and play it. It's unlikely that you will lose the game in the opening.

Yes Costelus, but the entire point is that I dislike the anti-Marshalls so I'm in the market for something else.

What I dislike is that you don't have much or any opportunities for active play in the anti-Marshall, and in most black defenses to the Lopez actually. What I'm really hoping to find is something with a more Open Games "feel". I'm happy to play anything white wants after 1. e4 e5 except the anti-Marshall. That might seem no big deal, since it is only one variation, but the writing on the wall tells me that I am going to be facing it more than the rest very soon, and I don't really care for passive positions.

Yes ;)

He have made a book about the move a6 in modern defense. In that book he also explains this opening. It's pretty cool to see him use it in torneys. 

The Gajewski is similar to the Marshall and Black gets excellent play when White plays the most obvious move of taking the pawn on d5. Also you wont need to prepare for the anti-marshall because you can just start with d6 instead of 0-0. Not to mention it's not covered in any book except for that very recent "Attacking the Spanish" so your opponents are highly unlikely to come up with the best play against it. Even GMs faltered when facing it for the first time.

im starting to like 3 ...Nd4 this is called bird's defense