People not playing past 3rd/6th ranks

There is a major flaw in generalizing that just because a player's pieces and pawns aren't past the third rank that the player is doing nothing.  There are a number of defenses in particular where this is true:

Hippopotamus - Some players play this regardless of what does, which is utter cr*p.  This should only be played when White specifically has NOT played f4, and White has committed to either a4 or Bc4 (i.e. 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nc3 d6 4.Nf3 a6 5.a4 (or 5.Bc4 e6) b6 and Black's subsequent moves will be e6, h6, Bb7, Nd7, and Ne7 in most cases, in some order.  Occasionally if White does something strange, one of the Knights might go to f6 or c6.

Hedgehog - Frequently used in the English or Sicilian Kan.  For example:  1.c4 c5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 e6 4.g3 b6 5.Bg2 Bb7 6.O-O Be7 7.d4 cxd4 8.Qxd4 and Black follows up with a6, d6, O-O, Nbd7, Qc7/Rc8/Qb8 or just Qb8, etc, and all of Black's development sits behind that pawn wedge on the third rank.

It's not like Black is doing nothing in these two defenses.

Not really.

The positional, tactical, and defensive themes, know-how, and improvisational skills needed to defend these types of positions against even decent club-level attacking skills -- even blunt, caveman style ones -- falls well into the master range.

If you ever get a willing master in a simul, put him on the defensive side of a hippo against Houdini, get all the pieces aligned in some kind of typical attacking formation, and sac a knight against a key defensive pawn in such a way that the machine is good and certain black has a 1.5-2 pawn advantage, and let him go at it.

The disadvantages?  All white's pieces are aggressively placed.  All his pawns are advanced/advancing in key spots.  All black's defensive resources are spread out and targeting different things on different parts of the board.

A Spassky or a Petrosian can save this kind of game, and prove the sac for the unsound bit of hope chess it is at the billionth ply.  Most amateurs will be dead in fifteen moves.  Most masters will be dead in twenty five.  The fact that it's nearly impossible for almost everyone to defend these positions against good attackers is why these openings don't make it into the major league events.

The resources to defend these positions ARE there.  I agree.  But not one person out of a thousand will find them with any kind of regularity once a decent time to tear open the position is found.

A person playing this kind of defense is most definitely playing theoretically solid moves.  But for all practical purposes, and most certainly for anyone below master level, you can safely generalize that they are doing nothing.  Unless they're online and using an engine to boost their play.  The graveyards of caught-cheating lists are littered with successful hippo players who were just a little too much better than Spassky with this stuff.

No competent players who aren't cheating get away with using the modern/hedgehog beyond about 2000 online.  None.  I've seen engine analysis prove it out hundreds of times.

I totally disagree.  There are multiple players, one a low master, the other an A-Player, that specifically play different than their norm because they are unable to beat my hippo, which I've mowed them over with.  One of them played 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nc3 d6 4.Nf3 a6 5.a4, the other 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nc3 d6 4.Bc4.  I won both.

You can not walk into the game saying "I'm going to play the Hippo against all openings" and expect to win.  When I face the Classical (4.Nf3) without 5.a4, then ...b5 often comes into the picture.  When White plays an Austrian Attack (4.f4), never in a million years will the Hippo ever work.

It's just like the Stonewall Dutch.  You can't go into the game saying you will play a Stonewall against every but e4.  After 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e6 4.Nf3, 4...d5 is a HORRIFIC move (5.Bf4, 6.e3, 7.Bd3, Significant Advantage White!), 4...Bb4 is correct, playing an improved Nimzo-Indian (...f5 is more effective than Nf3).

So to pre-meditate these slow systems is indeed wrong.  But in the right circumstances, they are perfectly fine.

I also noticed you said nothing about the Hedgehog.  I guess you must be admitting that the Hedgehog is fine for Black, again IF USED UNDER THE RIGHT CIRCUMSTANCES!  Most common in this case is the English, Sicilian Kan, or Sicilian with 5.f3 (1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.f3 and Black has a number of options:  5...e5 and 5...g6 are the main two, but 5...Nc6 can often lead to a direct transposition to the Accel Dragon Maroczy Bind, and 5...e6 with often lead to a Hedgehog.

I had a game in December where I was White in the 5.f3 Sicilian, opponent played a Hedgehog, and Black won that game!  I've been on both sides of the Hedgehog with both wins and losses on each side.  It's not an illegitimate defense as long as it's used properly.

Other openings/defenses that rookies seem to try to use all the time and utterly fail include:

London System:  Horrible for White after 1.d4 g6, e.g. 2.Nf3 Bg7 3.Bf4 d6 4.e3 Nc6 (or 4...Nd7) 5.h3 e5! with a slight advantage for Black

Queen's Indian Defense:  Yes, I've seen beginners play 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 b6?? 4.e4! because clearly they have no clue as to the purpose behind the Queen's Indian, and think it's just a random stand-alone opening with a random stand-alone name when they are clearly too stupid to realize that the purpose of the QID is the same as the NID, PREVENT e4!. After 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3, White threatens e4, so Black must stop it with 3...d5 or 3...Bb4 (pinning the defender), or else break up White's center with 3...c5 (Modern Benoni).  3...b6 only works against 3.Nf3 because 3.Nf3 does nothing to threaten e4, so Black has at least 2 moves to prevent e4, so he spends them playing ...b6 and ...Bb7, and the Bishop covers e4!

Passitivity is not always a bad thing.  Overextension is just as bad as Passitivity!

I'd say the two biggest things a sub-master player (and maybe all players) need when facing something like the hippo are:

1.  Respect for the opening and
2.  Patience

I'm too afraid to play this kind of opening myself for fear of losing my counter chances while my opponent neverendingly builds an attack.  But playing against it has taught me a few things about space.  How it's useful and how it's disadvantageous -- every pawn move contains both.  As thrillerfan said over-extension is bad just like passivity.  Your pawns never go backwards, remember that as you reflect that your opponent's position currently has zero weaknesses.

I believe to beat it, you have to use your space... which will take a lot of maneuvering and a good eye for tactics.  I try to adopt almost an endgame mindset where when your opponent has no threats you take your time to build your own threats.  First of all, if you take 5 moves to make a threat instead of just 2, it's harder for them to continue making moves if they're cramped.  Secondly, the general idea being, after you make threats, then you shift your threats to a different part of the board.  Because you have more space they won't be able to shift their defense.

I shall refer you to a couple of links rather than re-entering the games here.  These are the two games I was referring to in message 25 when I said "I won both".  Admittedly, the second one should have been a draw, but White wanted too much out of the position, and went astray at move 32.

http://www.charlottechess.com/games2/1106.htm

http://www.charlottechess.com/games2/1147.htm

Both games are annotated as well.

You need to be aware of the strength of black's bishops. In the first game white lost the centre and was getting overrun. Black had two bishops slashing up the board...White should have exchanged at least one of the pair the first chance he got.

He also should have tried to get rid of black's bishop on the side black castled.

In the second game he gave up his black-square bishop for a knight.

Here is the famous Kasparov vs Topalov game:

http://gameknot.com/annotation.pl/tournament-in-wijk-aan-zee-annotated-by-g-kasparov?gm=216

On move 7. Kasparov annotates: 'Better late than never. It is useful to exchange the Bishop.'

Another Kasparov game against the Hedgehog specialist Ulf Andersson.

What I get from the players with more experience and from reading about chess it that too often beginners ask for some sort of cure all. There is  no cure all and even more importantly the answer is not usually about chess theory on openings and position, since a chess amateur cannot really understand those concepts without first having a really good understanding of tactics.Take the opposite of the OP's post where the question is: what do I do when white takes up all the space in the middle and I cannot see a way to counter. That would be a lot easier way of explaining the problem, since its easy to spot what to do when a beginner playing white over extends. You see that a lot in the lower ratings, where they leave themselves no protection or no place to castle or pieces are overextened and undermined. It is really the same complaint since both complaints fail to see the nuanced differences in the positions of solid passive play or solid aggressive play. I would agree with Thrillers post which sums up nicely in a way a beginner can understand the chess theory. But I think Scottrf, who oddly did not reply as I have often observed him, or Pfren make points more pertinent to begginers asking about openings. Whether it is: Whats better ( e4 or d4 ), or: What do I do about early aggressive Queens, etc. That is that the focus should be tactics.