Most boring opening?

And more speciically, which variation of that paticular opening? I find the Berlin variation of the Ruy Lopez with a queenless middle game pretty boring to play.

Exchange variation of the French

I like boring/drawish openings from both sides. I really don't like tactical openings because I'm not a tactical player. I just like simple chess. Thus, I play the Giuoco Pianissimo as white vs 1...e5, Russolimo/Moscow as white vs 1...c5, Petrov against 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3, and the Q.G.D. against the Queen's Gambit. The only one of those openings that often gets tactical for me is the Petrov because a lot of people play the Cochrane Gambit. However, I don't think that gambit is white's best chance for a win and I do better against it than I do against the two main lines- 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 d6 4. Nf3 and 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. d4.

@PowerfulPawn007 I heard the London isn't played at the high level because it does badly after 1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Bf4 c5. I have heard that that line is better for black than it is for white and it's really hard to sidestep? I wouldn't know, though, since I don't play 1. d4.

I  quite like it, especially at a lower level.

1.d4

I play the above as black...my favorite line when people go into Four Knights against the Petrov.

Anything symmetrical.

Well, if you play the Petroff, it's no surprise you play 4...Nd4. :)

Slav exchange variation.

El Giuoco Pianissimo.

Sitting and waiting for the first mistake of the opponent.

1.e4 e5, 2.Nf3 Nc6, 3.Bc4 Bc5, 4.Nc3 Nf6, 5.d3 d6 ('Papa, he always imitates me!'), 6.h3 h6, 7.a3 a6. Because of those timid moves a3a6h3h6 some machos call this the 'Girl's Opening' (at least after knowing Judith, this is a grotesque joke...), 8.0-0 0-0.

Indeed, not exciting.

@schlechter55 I play the Giuoco Pianissimo a bit differently than you do:

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Nf6 5. d3 d6 6. Bb3 etc...eventually pushing d4.

You are funny, I NEVER play the Giuoco Pianissimo. I gave it as an example of a too timid opening.

The nly reason why it is well-known is that it is a tool for chess trainers to illustrate rules of development:

1. Knights, 2. Bishops, 3.Castle, 4.Only then start doing something.

Some trainers never reach a state (or do not have students who are passionate enough) where you learn that those rules are simplifications ...

Exchange ANYTHING (French, Caro-Kann, KID, what have you) is terribly dull.

Funny, most things mentioned here I enjoy playing.

Boring openings are the ones with long forcing tactical lines. People just regurgetate moves they read in a book which they don't understand.

Not necessarily - boring openings can also just be short sequences that lead to near-equal positions that have few chances for either side.

Few chances for each side doesn't exist at our level.

I play the berlin endgame, exchange slav, exchange kid, exchange QGD with nf3, and a ton of other early endgame/drawish lines and I only draw about 10% of my games online.

Amatuers spend so much time memorising the moves of their favourite opening that their endgames are usually horrible.

But still, playing an opening that relies on your opponent to make a mistake for its success doesn't appeal much to me. I prefer strategic games with imbalances to work with, not 30-move-theory sicilians or drawish theoretical engames (My USCF is 1815 by the way, just as reference).