I find it amusing that the london opening is referred to as the boring opening.  This is a solid opening for amateur players like myself that do not know alot of theory and it seems that experienced players try to downplay it by calling it boring.  If I am mistaken, please correct me and otherwise, please enlighten me.

Is this opening boring b/c black does not have a superior response to it and must progress along a path that leads to a draw?  If not, is it considered boring to experienced players that easily defeat it?  Boring is a subjective term and I would like to understand how it applies to this opening.  How do you guys feel about this opening? 

The london system is a solid opening.  It does not possess the excitement of the open games nor does it require as much theoretical knowledge as the open games. 

In case anyone doesn't know what this thead is about, the London System (1 d4  2 Nf3  3 Bf4) can be played against virtually any Black defense.  It is easy to play, yet somewhat unambitious.  Theoretically, Black can equalize, but White may have a "practical" advantage if the London System is White's main opening system.  That's because s/he is more likely to be familiar with the common middlegame themes that occur.  Fritz 9 or MCO-15 may think it's "=" (and they're probably right), but I've had excellent results with it for over twenty years.

When I play 1.d4 I always play the London system, it is hardly boring compared to 1.e4...e5.

i read somewhere that it is called "boring" because one of white's main goals with the opening is to restrict black's counterplay as much as possible - thus it is 'boring' insofar as games with less counterplay opportunities are such

My experience is that the Kings indian is what most club players book up on as black. I mean I have seen way too many guys open their chess bag to reveal it is full of KID books. Playing the white side of the KID against these guys is increadibly annoying. I play the London set-up against the kings indian and they know how to play this too. 1.d4,Nf6    2.Bf4,g6   3.Nf3,Bg7   4.e3,0-0  They just avoid an early...d6 since I havn't played e4 and take maximum advantage of the move order. Any suggestions?  

My suggestion would be to play 2.c4 against 1...Nf6. Then it's not a gambit like 1...d5, and playing the London against Nf6 isn't very difficult for black.

2. f4 (if you have the gumption) will quickly dispel any notions of boredom.

2 Bf4 leaves White's b-pawn unprotected.  Typically, at some point Black can play the natural Qb6 and force White to spend time protecting the pawn. 

 The London system was one of Lasker's favorite. It is sound and promises an easy development for Black. However it might be too drawish for some.

 Remember that the 2.Bf4 move order for white in the London is used to take some of the sting out of black's options after 1...d5.

Against 1...Nf6, you can revert to the old-school 2.Nf3 move order, when if your opponent then plays 2...d5, you can still go 3.Bf4 and continue with the London as you wish, no harm, no foul.

But if he moves then in a KID direction, you have 3.Nc3 a la Hebden, which opens up the whole Barry/Tarzan complex if your opponent tries to take advantage with a quick ...d5, or transposes into a Pirc if he stays with ...d6, which you can play as aggressively or dully as you choose.  These lines at least let white keep some degree of the initiative in determining how the game will develop.

yeah... I mixed up the move order in my first post. Thank you everyone for your suggestions, they were helpful.

Most Queen Pawn games are boring (especially Double Queen Pawn Games), that's mainly why I'm an e4 player.

You already know the answer. Even 1.d4 is boring to a high rated player like uhohspaghettio. Even the whole chess game was boring to Bobby Fischer.

It is boring when BOTH you and your opponent already know the a and z of what supposed to be done in a game.

For serious play, I have a database of middle game positions which I consider the starting position of my games. Unless my opponent wants to take a risk with theoretically inferior openings, I will not have to think in the opening stage. The London system is not my opening because there's no theoretical advantage. But if I don't know much about openings, don't want to study the openings, and play against 1500 players, I might want to make use of the system.

I will often divert from my "database" of best play, but will not divert to a completely different opening

I usually play 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bf4 c5 to shake things up. There are ideas like ...Qa5, ...Qb6 or ...g6 available to keep some tension in the center.

After 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 I imagine 2...c5 allows about the same pressure in the center.

Well First, d4 Is my Favorite Opening, and in my opinion better than e4. Second, it is called the "boring opening" because a player realized that white was restricting black counterplay, thus boring his opponent to death. Not literally boring.