My coach told me of 2 opening challenges he invented when he was a kid and was going to attempt but never followed suite and now wonders if had he gone with the challenges would he have been any stronger. Well im going to do one of the challenges but I need help choosing which one to do so I'm posting both here to see what you guys think. Its very detailed on how to carry out both cahllenges correctly but im just going to sum it up as best as possible.

Challenge choice #1: chose a specific opening variation and play it all day non-stop and chose a different  variation for the next day and play that all day then a diffrent variation and do the same procedure for 4 months.

Challenge choice #2: Choose a specific opening variation and only play that variation for a week then choose another variation for the next week then another for the next ans so on for 8 to or 10 months depening on the time you have to spare but unlike choice 1 you dont have to play it all day at the very minimum 2 games day every day for the whole week.

The only exceptions during either challenge one doesn't have to play the opening variation chosen is when there competeing in a rated tournament (real/OTB) or unrated cash prize (real) tournament or game. (If your a heavy gambler don't even try these challenges)

I'm a bit puzzled. Who would you be playing these games against? And what if they don't go into your variation?

You dont have to be that strict, you can create your own challenge to suite your own needs.  For example, play one variation 20 times in a row, then the next, regardless of how many days or weeks that takes you.  This way, you can fully learn the variation as you wish based on your schedule.  I've heard the best way to learn an opening is to play it 100 times and then start to study it, so that you can appreciate all the lessons and techniques better.

the answer to 2nd question is THEAMETIC GAMES and I'd play against people willing to play the same line or just setup the initial position with a computer or engine heck I could just play myself !!

by going over the games right after playing them I can just keep making improvements for each game that the next game will have better quality play than the last and so on. The only reason I'm giving myself a period of time is to stay on track thats all this also a test of how well I balance my schedule with my chess study for the future.

I looked at both for awhile and I love choice 2 I think you'lll get more from it.

I just got another idea why dont I do one at the rating im at now and the other when I reach 1900 but I dont know which I should do now and whihc I should do later ?? still confused.

How about choosing to not do either one? 

that sounds dumb

Both are untested, apparently even by your coach... however the specifics are unimportant.  Effort = increase in skill.  It's more important to get started and be flexible with your plan than it is to set something in stone.

Besides, I bet even if we all voted one way, and after a week or two you realized you'd learn better breaking it up into 4.87 day segments, then that's just what you'd do.

I chosen to do choice number 2 for now then choice 1 when I'm at  least 1900 or higher

No, these are not challenges which will increase your strength in any way.  Some abbreviated form might work in preparation for a tournament, though.

You will have far better results if you play fewer variations and fewer openings, because you gain experience in the typical positions - and the ideas never change, they depend far more on the pawn structure than the move orders.

Instead of trying to learn variations, play over master+ games in the opening lines you want to learn.  Play over the entire games, even the draws and the losses for "your" side, but don't spend too much time on any one game - try to average around 15 minutes each.  The idea is not to try to analyze and memorize, but to learn the various plans for both sides and how they succeed or fail, in the middlegame and on through in many cases to typical endings. 

If you do this over time, you will begin to recognize the patterns and tactics and strategies and apply them to your own games.  You will not have memorized lines; you will have  learned how to handle positions.  It won't matter so much the move order played if you understand what you need to be doing in a formation.

But time is limited, so this can only work with a limited range of openings.  Strive for deep knowledge of a narrow field over shallow knowledge of a broad field.

Helltank's Opening Challenge:Play 1.b4 exclusively for a week, then 1.g4, then 1.a4 then 1.h4. You won't improve your openings, but you sure will get a sense of what to do if your opponent tries to lead you into unfamiliar territory with these moves.

Helltank's Opening Challenge 2:Play 1.b3 2.Bb2 3.g3 4.Bg2 no matter what Black does. You'll get a sense of hypermodern openings and learn how to maximize the use of the fianchettoed bishops(for example, when one bishop's diagonal is blocked, the other bishop's scope increases). 

Brilliant advice. This is the way all players should study openings.

Eh what about 1.b3 b6 2. Bb2 Bb7 3. g3?? Bxh1