Your opinion on the Ruy Lopez Exchange Variation

My opinion: It gives black an easy game. He can play f6 and castle queenside with a good game. Or if white goes for d4, the c-pawn cramps white's position after 5.d4 exd4 6.Nxd4 c5. The doubled pawns don't really ensure white that much of an advantage and aren't really exploitable.

My opinion: if White exchanges off Black's e pawn via a d4 push, he creates a kingside majority which may be an edge in the endgame if he can nurture it throughout the game. Black, on the other hand, retains the two Bishops. If he opens up the position in the middlegame, he should be able to hold his own. However, he does have the doubled pawns to worry about.

It is playable but it is so early its hard to tell if the Bishop for Knight and stacked pawns is good. I do know that Fischer was an Expert in all aspects of the Ruy Lopez so maybe he just liked to switch it up occasionally. 

Based on the comments above and some of the things I know about RLE, these could be some of White's plans:

• Get rid of Black's bishop pair.
• Create a 4 to 3 kingside pawn majority.
• Exchange pieces (I would think it would be important (in some cases) to try to keep the queens on the board, esp. if Black has the bishop pair, in order to have some "long distance" control to compete with Black. So maybe Qe2 followed by Rd1, if possible, should be considered). 
• Keep the game closed as much as possible.
• Attempt,if possible, to exploit the doubled c-pawns and it is probably also important to watch out for c5.
•  Make the queenside knight more useful, for example, on c3 the knight cannot move to squares e4, d5, or b5, while the other squares do not do any good. (Maybe e5 followed by Ne4).
• Black has open lines to both of his bishops. This can be a problem for White. So King safety is important from the start.
• Try not to turn the game into one in which you defend the whole time. Probably a good idea knowing how to deal well with the often played Bg4.
• Keep an eye on and deal with the light-squared bishop specifically. White does not have one, so Black's light squared bishop will be more powerful.

It's a snoozer.  

A reason to drop the 2. ...Nc6 all together.

I play it as white, I like it.  White gets a long lasting, solid advantage.  The downside is it's a fairly small advantage :)  But it suits me, I like endgames and static pluses like a healthy pawn majority.

I also don't like the very dense and very sharp mainline Ruys -- incredible positions that I enjoy watching GMs play, but wouldn't play myself at a tourney.

Lasker was also fond of the Ruy exchange and won a very famous game against the mighty Capablanca with it !  Fischer's record with it is simply incredible, much like Spassky's with white in the kings gambit.

This is off topic, I know, but have you ever read Fischer's article "A Bust to the King's Gambit?"

The Exchange with 5. d4 is just drawish IMO, and played by people who want to trade pieces early and avoid complicated middlegames. The Fischer variation with 5. 0-0 is a bit more of a winning try because the Black has some inconvenience to defend the e-pawn, but still not terribly interesting.

I said that I would find it boring from the White side, not necessarily from the Black side. Also, I am not sure about the logic that, if your opponent finds the opening boring, it must be a good choice. The main consideration IMO is if the opening suits you, not if it suits the opponent.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz......

That the Exchange is a good surprize weapon is somewhat like saying that the French is a good surprize weapon because the opponent must surely be expecting the Sicilian. If the Black player is at all experienced, they will be familiar with the line. Fischer's 5.O-O may have been something of a surprize back then, but not so now.

Echecs06, Bobby employed this line only from 1966 onwards, and then only occasionally. He wasn't too gung ho on the Exchange Variation, and even if he was, it was probably a sign of his, um, mental deterioration, if you know what I mean.

The Ruy Lopez exchange variation has a drop of poison, because basically if black just trades pieces he has a high probability of a losing K & P endgame. Black has to play actively and try to use the two bishops. I think it is a good variation for an amateur to learn.

Fischer played the Exchange once in the Reykjavik match and that game ended in a draw. 

The exchange variation has some nice long term ideas of exploiting the kingside majority, but the problem is that otherwise black has a very, very free game and the two bishops, oh yeah, and the d file. In my opinion that's quite enough to distract white from executing his long term, rather idealistic plan. Some people say it gives white some tiny advantage; I wouldn't even be so sure of that. I think it releases too much tension to be all that dangerous, though black does have to make sure that he doesn't trade TOO much stuff.

It's still a decent line, I just don't think it offers much chance for an objective advantage.

 Or play the Bird Variation 3...Nd4?!

When trying to win against a weaker player, i opt for main line 4.Ba4, but i employed the exchange variation recently against a higher rated player, when a draw seemed sufficient for me (and the game ended indeed in a draw). The pair of bishops is indeed a compensation for the damaged pawn structure, but it is not very easy to create concrete threats against White's position (especially after the Q exchange, which is quite common). 

Besides, in the game mentioned above: how about 11.g3 instead of 11.Nh2? 11... gxf3 12.Qxf3, White is safe, and after Q exchange, Black has no bishop pair, but still the worse structure.

J.