You studying openings this much is a joke. If you can memorize 20 moves of theory, but are then forced to resign 3 moves later because of your lack of positional and tactical chess, you are a fool. Learn to play chess good before memorizing a bunch of variations.
Getting booked up on White's responses to Sicilian...
Sort:
Well I kind of already did study openings this much...
Seriously, it's only like six variations. It's not a lot. I can do a lot more! I'll probably spend like a half hour or 20 minutes a day studying one variation of the Sicilian. That seems like a good compromise I kind of already looked at all of the six I mentioned fairly well. I will just go to the database and pick out one that I don't know very well. Then study it for 20-30 minutes roughly. Then do tactics, middle/endgame strategy, etc. This is kind of my schedule every day.
The opening can be viewed as a struggle to gain a single move advantage--the worse opening player will make one inferior move out-of-theory, and then all the rest of both sides' opening knowledge will no longer be used.
In the middlegame, both sides will need to recognize plans which stem from the position, and will fight to execute their side's first. Slipping up tactically would mean losing an entire piece, which makes it a whole lot easier for the opponent to convert the win. Slipping up positionally during the middlegame may mean having all chances of counterplay shut off, which gives the other player the opportunity to carry out his or her winning plan uncontested.
In the endgame, a single error may mean drawing or losing the game instead of winning. Conversely, having a better endgame than one's opponent may mean winning when one should have drawn or lost!
Hopefully this demonstrates the relative importance of studying each phase of the game.
By the way, I admit to enjoying opening theory as well, but I don't expect myself to improve as rapidly as those who mostly ignore it for early phases of their chess careers.
Exactly ponz111 is right.