Ruy Lopez exchange Variation or London System

I played for one year the Queens Gambit but now I get bored. My fave opening is thw Ruy Lopez Exchange Variation but the problem is that my opponent never plays e5 or a6 in the Spanish. further I have to prepare for a lot of defenses.

and your question is ??

You can still try Bxc6 against the Berlin or the Schliemann defences

My question is: what is better for me? I am a solid player and I said the ruy Lopez exchange Variation is my fave opening. the problem is that the most of my opponents never answer with e4. and this is the reason why I dont play e4. so whats better for me? play the london system or the Exchange Variation? when i play the london system i cab always play my opening. d4 Nf3 c3 e3 Bf4 and so on. i have not to play another system when mmy opponent doesnt answer with d5. so it doesnt exist a system for white with e4. All i. all i have to learn a lot of theory when i play e4. and now i have to decide. whats impotant? to play my fave opening with a lot of theory (sicilian, french, scandinavian, etc.) or the London?

Depends:

If you want an opening which you can play for the rest of your life: London System

If you want an opening where you can go closer and closer to the mainlines, play 1. e4! If you want to improve your game, this is probably the best way.

Playing the same moves over and over again makes the most rating points out of your skill, but won't make you stronger in any other opening

You have to be kind of Zen when playing white and not bank on any particular opening appearing on the board. As black, you have somewhat more control over the exact structure as you get to decide whether or not the game will be classical, for example. As white, if you want, say, a closed Spanish and your opponent says "Nope, I'd like a Sicilian," you're stuck in the Sicilian, and there's not a way to MAKE them play a closed Spanish. The London is good because it doesn't require theory at all - you need to know the moves and the ideas behind them, but there aren't long lines of the London to memorize. The Ruy Lopez has TONS and TONS and TONS of different variations which can be triggered by either player - learning them all would be basically impossible and, at any rate, not much use, but the sheer amount that has been written on the Ruy Lopez is enough to bury anyone. Of the two you mentioned, I would say London just because e4, e5 "fools mate, fools mate, fools mate!" is a pretty normal way for people to play below 1200, and you probably won't get to play your pet line until you break 1300 (because the players you're against won't know it - they'll just hit your f2 pawn with everything and hope you crack under the pressure).

Might I suggest the English? There's not a lot of theory, it's considered 'better' than the London system in general, it's highly positional, and you can get great some great delayed play in the center. 

Both suck, play the King's Gambit and dominate!

But the King's Gambit is boring. There is no spanish torture in that opening!.

And the King's Gambit is considered fairly unsound...you'll get sucker wins in the beginning, but I think there will be diminishing returns to playing it as a regular idea. 

When you play 1e4, you should expect ...c5 just under half the time....e5 about a fifth of the time. The French roughly about 15% and the Caro Kann ~ 7%. These  four responses make up nearly 90 % of the e4 responses.

So when you play 1e4 your number one expectation should be the Sicilian.

Try the Veresov. I have more fun playing that than I do playing the London. It's not quite as autopilot as the London, but I think it leads to more interesting games.

The King's Gambit is considered perfectly sound (at worst a small advantage for Black, but he must know a lot of theory).  The Exchange Ruy Lopez is considered perfectly sound (at worst a small advantage for Black, if he knows a little theory).  The London System is considered perfectly sound (at worst a small advantage for Black in some critical lines, which White can avoid if he knows theory). 

All of these "garbage openings" are basically equal, it's just the King's Gambit is a lot more interesting...

Its people like you that stopped me playing 3...a6

i think the london system is better

it is a lot more solid

I'd always prefer the vienna gambits to the kings gambit, they really are just better.

If you want an opening that doesn't require you to respond intelligently to your opponents moves while learning chess then the London is a good choice. But if your goal is to avoid boredom the london is not a good choice.

That sounds like a great way to think about it. Do you have the breakdown by level? I assume a 1200 playing e4 should not be expecting the same response from his opponent than a 2000 playing e4.

You can get move percentages at any elo you like via the lichess analysis board. Very useful feature when crafting an opening repertoire.

At 1200 level rapid/blitz 57% play e5, 12% play c5, 9% d5, 7% e6, 5% c6

So I guess these players haven't discovered the sicilian yet. The sicilian overtakes e5 in popularity at around 2000 elo.