Anti-Sicilians, ok, but what about the antis for the other 1.e4 defenses?

I play the Sicilian, and as we all know it has a ton of "antis", or opening systems White can use against it to avoid mainline theory.

But maybe the other 1.e4 defenses have a lot of antis too, maybe they're just more obscure and unheard of because nobody feels a need to use them.

Take the French for instance. There are the obvious antis like the French Exchange and King's Indian Attack, but these get played so commonly against it that the French player feels comfortable. It's almost like these aren't even anti-Frenches at all.

But there's also something I found called The Reti Gambit where you just play 2.b3. I read a thread in the French group of people discussing this, the overall tone in the thread seemed to be one of annoyance and anger at the opening. Some people were saying it was nothing to worry about, but you could tell most of them didn't wish to play against it.

I think non-Sicilian players get spoiled by not having to contend with antis in the majority of their games, this is exactly why I want to play antis against all of them. So what are some more antis? How about ones for the Scandinavian? It's said of the Scandinavian that if you play it you always get your opening on the board, well surely this can't be true. There must be at least a few good antis out there against it? And what about for the Alekhine, and the Nimzowitch, and all the others?

I know the English isn't a 1.e4 defense, but what about it too? I'd like to learn something against the English that completely changes the character of the game and get's the English Player into an uncommon position that they're not used to.

Thanks for all the info.

That's always what happens to me when I play e5 against the Scandinavian. Here's a blitz game I played, I did manage to win the game by winning a pawn, and my opponent resigned. I had less time than him though, so if he had kept playing he might have won. http://en.lichess.org/IjfUf6Ou

I will try out 2.Nc3 against it, or perhaps, something I saw on youtube that looked interesting is exchanging the pawn, then when the queen recaptures instead of Nc3 playing Nf3.

Everything is in the name. What you call anti sicilian is just not a open sicilian. White does not want to play the same strategy as you. 

In that logic you could call the tarrasch defence against the french an anti french or you could call italian anti berlin defence. 

The "Anti-French" opening I use from time to time is the Alapin-Diemer Gambit.

#book

The anti-scandinavian does not come out till move 3. After 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5, play 3.Nf3. you got to be patient for a while as White, but it will pay off.

If you are considering the b3 gambit against French, why not against the Scandi too?

I used to play 3.Bb5+ against the 2...d6 Sicilians. I also played 3.Bb5 against 2...Nc6 in Open games too.

I define an anti-opening as one that is played primarily because the opponent is percieved to have more theoretical knowledge and experience in the main lines of an opening, thus a battleground is sought where this specialized knowledge of the opponent will have no bearing. By this definition the Tarrasch is certainly not an anti-French, as the French player will be comfortable in it, and in many cases will have been studying and playing games against the Tarrasch for over a decade.

Anti-Sicilians are popular not just because "White doesn't want to play the same strategy as black" (since in an open Sicilian there are different strategies from White to chose from) but because the main line Sicilians are highly theoretical and Sicilian players are assumed to be booked up.

The whole idea of the 1.e4 repertoire I'm trying to create is one that tries to make whatever opening study the opponent has done irrelevant. There's a certain satisfaction I get from playing something uncommon, and knowing that all that hard work my opponent has done studying his opening for years and years has gone right out the window, at least in the context of the game. I mean obviously we wouldn't want anyones hard work to be completely wasted, but just in the context of the games I play against them, I want to fight on a battleground I'm more familiar with and not in my opponent's back yard. I'm sure many of you feel the same.

An "anti" you could try against the Scandi, the 2...Nf6 variation anyway, is 3. Bb5+ -- Fischer used to play this.

An "anti" you could try against the Caro-Kann is 2. Nf3 d5  3. exd5 cxd5  4. Ne5 -- depending on the level of the opposition you might lure a lot of opponents into the trap 4...Bf5?  5. Bb5+

An "anti" you could try against the Modern or Pirc is 2. Bc4 intending d3 instead of d4

Thanks for the suggestions everyone, perhaps we can amass a list of antis rated by least to most commonly played.

Another option against the Scandinavian I remembered is playing 2.d4 transpoing to the Blackmar-Diemar gambit.

The Caro-Kann is one of the few openings I don't need an anti for, since I'm having a rip-roaring good time playing the exchange variation against it.

And as far as the Modern/Pirc I'm using the 150 attack since it ties in with my 1.d4 repertoire.

What about the English?

Why would you waste your time with an "anti" against an inferior defense?

I don't think any of the aforementioned defenses are inferior.

That being said, an inferior defense is actually superior if the person using it has been playing and analyzing it for decades with me going up against them having played 1.e4 for less than a year. Especially since I'm always trying to play against equal or higher rated opposition now. It's hard enough to beat a higher rated opponent to begin with, let alone doing it in his own back yard. Some of these people have been playing chess since they were in elementary school and these openings they specialize in, they were like their bedtime stories. How can you beat a higher rated opponent in an opening that was their bedtime story? Better to bring the game into unfamiliar turf, so they'll have to think from the beginning, and not be able to rely on all their past experience.

The line I suggested against the CK leads to an Exchange Variation structure if Black doesn't fall for 4...Bf5? and White then follows up with d4

Well I'm happy playing the normal exchange variation and moving a piece twice in the opening for no reason seems dodgy to me. I don't think anyone would play 4...Bf5 when something like Nc6 seems more sensible, and even if they did play 4...Bf5 I don't entirely understand why after 5.Bb5+ Black couldn't just retreat with Bd7. Your opening line is an interesting idea though, I'm sure it's entirely playable. Where did you hear about this idea at or did you invent it?

Ugh the Reti gambit sucks...I played it twice OTB and won 1 out of two out of a lucky blunder in the end..hated my position. I felt like I was down material and was playing to draw and had no real attack or initiative. The Milner however...can be fun.

My experience differs. A few months ago there was a day, I'm pretty sure it was a Saturday, I had gone to sleep no earlier than 3AM the previous night and woke up at 6AM because I needed to use the bathroom. I wanted to go back to sleep especially since the whole week previous I hadn't slept much either, but I also really wanted to play chess, so I sat down at my computer, went to chess.com, and proceeded to play live standard games for the entire day while I was exhausted. Needless to say I lost most of these games, but that day I had no losses using the Reti, which I used twice to first draw with an >1800 player and then win against someone around my own rating.

Antis are not a device to avoid learning theory and opening study, they are only for avoiding going into the theoretical preparation of your opponent. We still have to study and play games in our chosen antis to be good at them, and especially before we can make a judgement. I quite like playing the Reti because I can sense in all my games that my French opponent is a little surprised, and most of the time they also don't get that typical French pawn structure they're so familiar with.

Well it's like you said, anything which is very strong will likely be popular and thus known.

And anything unpopular will be less powerful if your opponent is accurate.

Maybe you should just try the exchange variations, but those give away almost all your advantage. Or, you could, you know... man up and learn a book like that fits your style.