QID/Nontraditional setups against the London.

I've played the Dutch so much that I might as well get a t-shirt that reads "1...f5!!", but, as I improve, I'm beginning to get the distinct impression that my opponents are going to eventually stop conceding me the whole center, the bishop pair, and a massive attack in every game. So I'm beginning work on a QID/Nimzo repertoire, and, as a d4-c4 player, I'm relatively confident in meeting most of the main line stuff since I know the structural themes from the white side, but the London always puts me a little bit on the back foot. 

It's not that 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bf4 d5 is incredibly good for white, it's that we're playing exactly what white wants us to play. The London player is a humble sort; they don't want an opening advantage, they want a pawn in the center, a good bishop, and a position that they understand and feel comfortable in....like an old sweater. Being the contrary sort of woman I am, my repertoire goal is to forcibly drag the position away from what Mr. London is trying to achieve, and I want to get there without sacrificing pawns or making goofy looking, unsound moves.

After playing around on my own with an engine and then comparing that with a database, I came up with a sort of theoretical main line which I'll add below, but I thought it might be helpful to pass the question along to the forum: What sorts of nontraditional setups work against the London? How are others peeling white out of the comfort zone after 1...Nf6 2.Bf4?

I don't think the QID setup is especially good against the London. Kasparov and others have played a plan with a4, then Nd2-c4 with an edge for white. At least as much an edge as can get with London against anything anyway. 

If don't mind the french, Eingorn as suggested 1.d4 e6 2.Bf4 c5 then early Qb6 which looks very sound.

Some time ago attempted to play the Nimzo/ Queens Indian combo myself.The consensus on this forum is that it is the perfect black defense. However there are some problems. Firstly it is a tremendous amount of work, covering in addition catalan, and non c4 openings like the london.

In addition the QP openings, like the london, have more kick against an early e6, than for example d5, where black equalises smoothly with minimal effort, or the kingsindian were black has more flexibility, and greater winning chances. 

Another problem is that the Queen's Indian itself in many lines leads to some of the dullest and most drawish positions in chess.

These issues lead me to decide to take up the KingsIndian instead.

One of the reasons I always find myself coming back to the Dutch is that it may be a dysfunctional position, but it's my dysfunctional position, and I usually get something that feels familiar and playable. The black side of the main line London is the precise opposite: It's someone else's dysfunctional position, and they're bound to know it well. Maybe 1...e6 is the cure-all since I'm fine with the QID, the stonewall, and hedgehog positions, but the French has always made me a little bit nervous. When I first started studying, the French was the first defense I tried to learn....and I never had any space, my c8 bishop was terrible,  I could never time castling correctly, and I was always getting mated after some kind of Qg4 h4-h5 and smash, smash, smash.

Against the Catalan, I thought I could play an early c5 and 'fool' them into a Benoni....which isn't something I play masterfully, but the g3 variation isn't considered super 'challenging' from the white perspective, and I figure I am perfectly capable of playing g6, sacrificing a pawn on b5,  giving an exchange, and then checkmate.

As for the issue with tepid, drawish positions, I'm really not adverse to a nice quiet game. Down here in patzerville, people are mostly interested in hitting your face repeatedly with a shovel until you resign, so I'm usually quite content with shaking hands after a sleepy, technical game. The goal is - as often as possible - to play the game I dreamed up in analysis...whether it's a tactical firestorm, or a recipe for 90 move rook endings. 

Playing modern benoni against catalan is perfectly ok, and what I used to play too. Be aware it's not completely toothless for white though, and is recommended, g3 line, for white in Avrukh's rep books, for example. In latest version think he recommends a setup with bf4. My main objection would be under "vast number of lines need to know". Nowdays, would play 1.d4 nf6 c4 e6 3g3 Bb4ch which is the simplest line, and if play Bogo instead of Queens Indian wouldn't need to learn anything additional.

It's pity don't like the French, Eingorn  suggests a nice rep were delays playing nf6, to reach Nimzo like position's avoiding heavy theory, for example. It's fair enough though, French not for everybody.

I don't have my computer and database to study your first question right now.

However, regarding the French, I can say you probably just need a proper training.

The French is probably the opening I handle the most at my best level, and principles are easy to apply.

There are a lot of simple plan to get rid of your bad bishop (for instance: after ...Qb6 and maximum pressure on d4, ...Na5 followed by ...Bb5 / or the common ...b6 followed by ...Ba6 with a Knight still in b8 / after ...cxd4 and f6 followed by ...fxe5, the usual manoeuver Bc8-d7-e8-h5-or g6 thought I'm not fond of this one).

And I solve the castling issue by... non-castling before I get rid of White's light square Bishop or minimum material to prevent kingside sack. This is possible thanks to the pawn chain acting like a shield. Of course, there are exceptions, and these are the general ideas.

I hope it may help you.

If you want to work on it I can advise you some crystal clear study games such as this one:

https://www.chess.com/games/view?id=1305856

Step 1: Maximum pressure on d4 to force White pieces to defend it/ Step 2: get rid of your bad piece / Step 3 Bonus: take advantage of your opponent agressive style with your own. ;)