Ruy Lopez - what to play as Black?

Btw, by 'Closed Main Line', I mean this:

the rat endgame (d4 d6 c4 e5 dxe5) is actually extremely deceptive and a line into which i'd enter when playing to win as black. just take a look at your favourite database and see how badly white scores from that position, despite its innocent look and engine's 0.00!

it's hard to tell exactly what's wrong with white's position, though i think that it's something like it's hard to find constructive plans, while black's position is full of potential.

on the ruy lopez, i go with the open when i play e5 and it has definitely served me well.

I second all the recommendations of the Berlin, and Cox's book. You definitely have many chances to win, black has simple but effective plans, and if you know them you will just constantly improve your position while white usually does very little.

To date I believe the Berlin was my highest scoring defense against 1.e4. However, I couldn't stand the d3 italians and ruys, they were so incredibly boring that I went back to sicilian.

zaistez variation

try the marshall attack

The Marshall Attack is a very interesting line, but I don't have time to learn all the theory.  Plus, I don't really like the look of the anti-Marshalls ...

At amateur level, I would say there isn't much difference within the closed mainlines as far as "which gives Black more chances to win?". I think starting with either the Chigorin or Breyer first, then taking a look at Zaitsev as you get better would be an idea. At least that's the route I'm taking.

From one of Jeremy Silman's book review regarding Zaitsev(http://jeremysilman.com/shop/pc/Ruy-Lopez-A-Guide-For-Black-The-76p3519.htm):

"...
I must admit that, in my view, nobody under 2200 should ever touch this line. It’s too complex, demands too much memorization, and calls for a tremendous amount of tactical acumen. Don’t get me wrong, the Zaitsev is a fantastic system (and their treatment of it is magnificent), but it’s simply too much opening for a non-master to handle (just like a Formula 1 is too much car for the non-professional driver to touch). ...Summing up, I think The Ruy Lopez: A Guide For Black is useful for players from 1400 on up. Non-masters should avoid the Zaitsev, but the other lines are easy to learn and very solid. Masters that have a great memory and lust after hyper-sharp situations will love the Zaitsev, and be more than happy with the book’s superb coverage of this theoretical minefield."

@ vjekpleh:  wow, I hadn't realized the Zaitsev was anywhere near as sharp and theoretical as that.  Sounds like the Breyer is probably a decent choice to start with then. That was very helpful, thanks!  :-)

Seirawan had a neat video for an open ruy sideline that was really trappish on youtube.  Part of the sait louis videos but I don't remember which sorry.

A main "starting" position for the closed ruy goes like this:

Ok, thanks Fiveofswords.  I'll definitely check it out and it would be something different to play.  A lot of people seem to just play 2..Nc6 automatically.

guys he's not a beginner, seeing as his rating is >2000

One of the big perks in the Lopez complex is that you can add lines fairly easily without having to change huge parts of your repertoire.

With that in mind, I would not want to start with early deviations like the Berlin or Schliemann (decent enough openings though they might be). It might make more sense to start with something a bit deeper (like the Breyer that you mention) and then later it will be a smaller ask to add in later.

Of the openings you list, here are some brief notes of my opinions:

1) Breyer: excellent choice. Fundamentally sound, keeps pieces on the board, emphasises developing a strong positional sense over memorising theory. My top choice of the ones on your list.

2) Zaitsev: potentially crazy sharp complications demanding a good memory. And there is the issue of the fact that white can force a draw (there is the early ...Re8, Ng5, ...Rf8 repetition, although you can deviate if you want to, you can't guarantee a Zaitsev). It is a great line, but I wonder if it's a good choice for someone to use as a primary line while starting out.

3) Cozio. Slightly more offbeat, but an enterprising and sound choice. Getting it on the board early means that you will get the positions you like more often. But it is difficult to add in new lines later. There is also the option of playing ...a6 first, followed by Nge7, which Aronian has used to pick up some nice wins.

4) Classical. I think a rather decent choice, with the emphasis on quick development sure to hone your senses in the open game play in general. I don't know too much about it.

5) Schliemann. Another fine variation (since you're a diamond member, maybe check out Melik Khachiyan's video series on the Schliemann?). Some people think it's unsound, but others do not. Radjabov has had the guts to use it against strong opposition, so I have faith in its soundness. But again, deviating so early means that it will be harder to add in different lines later.

There are also many ways for black to interpret the Chigorin variation of the closed Lopez too.

You can't go wrong by committing yourself to the closed Lopez. Some of the positions that arise are the most intricate in chess, and have stood the test of time at the top level ever since they were first played.

Sure, by choosing an earlier deviation you might avoid some theory, like the exchange variation or the centre attack. But learning why and how black is ok in these variations is going to teach you a lot about chess.

Don't worry if you don't get your main variation on the board all the time---the sidelines themselves are interesting and equal positions for you to play.

@gillbod:  that's a great post and thanks very much for the advice.  I'm definitely coming to the conclusion that my best option is to go with the main line and build some familiarity with that first.  As you say, I think it would be easier to explore the early deviations later, armed with some experience of the main line, because I'll be able to see how those positions relate to it.  Also, it looks like the closed main line tends to lead to classical middlegames, where both sides are vying for central control with their pawns, which I think will help me learn techniques that will also be useful for other, similar types of positions.

One of the things that's turning me off the Open variation is that the resulting positions are too whacky and unique and it doesn't seem like there's much I can learn there that I can apply to other positions.

Right now I'm feeling pretty secure in my choice of the Breyer. 

@yeres30:  that is an interesting line, thanks.  Although, according to the Game Explorer, it looks like 6.0-0 may be better for White (i.e. ignoring the early pawn grab).

Oh, just noticed that the GM actually did that in the game you posted ...

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/the-lifetime-repertoire-reliable-ambitious

If this topic caught your attention, I suggest you look at the detailed article I wrote.

If I'm forced to play the Ruy Lopez I always play The Archangelsk which is:

 I've played the Archangel (Arkhangelsk) variation (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 b5 6.Bb3 Bc5!? modernized line, doesn't rush to play black ...Bb7. After playing ...d6 he got the idea to play ...Bg4. I suggest you to review.) a lot before, it's an option with active counter chances.
 As a player adopting the Kramposian style, I like Berlin variation very much. (John Cox's book is excellent. The book written by Igor Lysyj and Roman Ovetchkin is also very good.) Marshall Attack grabs my attention, but it's too forced variation. Zaitsev is not bad, but I don't like the Breyer and Chigorin variations. Because the positions formed are under pressure for Black. And they're not ambitious enough.