Wow, you people must be wired differently or something.

I always try to recognize the pawn structure of any oening i study.., This helps in the placement of the pieces accordingly... :)

Thanks for all your comments. It's good to know openings are not such important factor. That books are damage for peoples own creativity, understanding and thinking process, becouse we can play moves we remember as good withouth even know why, but that's another theme. Often I play intuitively including basic rules (control center, developing minor pieces, castle etc. at beginning) I know what tipycally are good places , but actually I get bored playing usual ideal system (pawns on e4, d4, Nc3, Nf6...) The way I think goes like this: 1.I look are all my pieces safe, if not than I defend them first (only if I think it's good for me that my opponenet take that piece than i don't defend at any price) 2. Than I look if I can take some undefended piece from my opponent. 3. If not than I look to what can I attack and making plan how to play pieces on best position. Is that usual way good players think, or they have strict plan from early beggining?

So play a Reversed Slav with the white pieces.  Simple.

Isn't that system already hot wired into your Croatian genes?

Ok let's say we play ruy lopez opening. Now how far I should learn that opening? Until move 10? with 100 of possible variations, what if I play my move 6 from the book and you don't know exactly this variation I play? My point is that there are huge range of possible moves I can chose as my opening that i like to play...

I don't know yet how this slav should go. I don't know from most of my games what opening i play. I know something about ruy lopez, italian, queens gambit and all other I don't know names of opening, just developing my pieces the way I think is correct...

he didn't highlight the Parham one did he ?

As others have said, you really don't need to know everything, or even close to everything (if it were even possible). That said, the amount you DO need to know is not trivial, and you won't learn it all overnight. It takes months or, more likely, years.

As far as knowing the names of the variations as the OP gave in his example, that just comes with studying chess for many years. You eventually learn the names of the important stuff (and a lot of the not-so-important stuff) whether you want to or not.

Here's my take on learning openings.

Step 1) Research every opening at a high level.  Go thru a bunch of GM Games really quickly (a computer would work best here, not a board and pieces), doing a few of each opening.  For example, if you are looking for a defense to 1.d4, flip thru 5 games of the King's Indian, 5 more Nimzo-Indian, 5 Queen's Gambit Declined, 5 Slav, 5 Dutch, etc.  This should not take you more than an hour to two hours tops.

Step 2) While flipping thru those games, just think of high-level themes that you would expect as each game progresses, like "Oh, White's going for a pawn break on c5".  Keep track of how many of your thematic ideas actually occur.

Step 3) Compare results, and see which opening you were able to nail the most thematic ideas.  That's the opening you should start playing in games.

Step 4) Pick up a book or books on that opening.  Preferably one that is lower-level that explains themes, like the "Starting Out" series by Everyman.

Step 5) Go thru the introduction of the book.  Read it Thoroughly.

Step 6) Start playing it in tournament games.  If the book you have is in "Complete Game" format, go thru those games as well, focusing on the main moves.

Step 7) After you've played a game, look in the book for the game that most closely matches the line that was played, see who went out of book first, and try to understand "why" the move was possibly a mistake.

Step 8) Skim thru the remaining parts of the book.  Don't try to go thru every move of every note.  If you are playing a line, and the main move for Black's 8th move is 8...Be6, and you played 8...Bd7, if there are notes on 8...a6?, 8...Bd7?, and 8...Bg4!?, and you see that 8...Bd7 is given a question mark, go thru that line to see why it's a bad move, and that way you understand next time to play a different 8th move.

Step 9) Beyond the Introduction and going thru the main moves of a game, an opening book is best used to learn what NOT to play, rather than memorizing reams of lines of what to play.

EXAMPLE:  A well-known trap is the Noah's Ark Trap.  It's in the Modern Steiniz Variation of the Ruy Lopez, specifically 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 d6 5.d4? (A very bad move, 5.c3, 5.Bxc6+, or 5.O-O are all better) 5...b5 6.Bb3 Nxd4! 7.Nxd4 exd4! 8.Qxd4?? c5!! 9.Qd5 Be6 10.Qc6+ Bd7 11.Qd5 c4 and the Bishop is trapped.

Does this mean I memorized reams of Variations of the Ruy Lopez?  No!  Instead, it helps you understand why d4 must be prepared, and not just thrown out there at the earliest possible moment.  Same thing goes for move 9 in the main line, and why everyone plays 9.h3 and only then 10.d4, and not 9.d4 instead.  Understanding the reasons behind moves, and more importantly, the reason why certain moves are bad, will help you find the right moves better than trying to keep a mental card catalog of every line of the Ruy Lopez known to man kind.

I think this is excellent advice; the only adjustment I would make is at Step 6, where I would replace tournament games with 15-minute or slower training games. I'd only risk my rating when I felt very comfortable with the opening.

@Thrillerfan - that's a very good way to do it, though the initial selection of sample games may be tricky if you don't have some guidance or good research skills (unless you've already mapped out the opening somehow).

I had a similar "newish" move played against me in a Budapest, except this one was even wierder. Couldn't figure out what to do in the game despite all of my effort studying the white side of the gambit.

What's the problem with 4...g5 5.Bg3 where White is simply up a pawn and has targets on the kingside? Black usually castles kingside in the Budapest anyway.

And after 4.Bf4 Bb4+ you are intending 5.Nbd2 and not 5.Nc3?! correct? Holding the pawn in this way leads to a severely damaged structure and isn't worth it.

Well, I like a functional approach.

When I played the Ruy with black and white, I'd know the basic setup with Bb5-a4-c2, the h3 move to prevent Bg4 and the Nd2-f1-e3 move.

If black played the open defence Nxe4, I'd know a handful of moves for that. I also knew a line against the Steinitz with d6.

The Marshall happened sometimes. I didn't know it well, but it shouldn't bother you if you play a4.

Instead, if I was black and white exchanged on c6, I had a line for that. Otherwise I played the main line as well. (a6, b5, move knight, c5 and such)

If I'm generous and say those were 6 main ideas with 10 moves, while the opening was always the same, then you get to 60+5 = 65 moves. And that is all I ever knew about the Ruy which I played for years. If it went differently I'd know the idea of the position and play it from there. Never any theory problem.   

After looking at both lines I feel that they both offer white good play. I think the Nc3 line is perfectly playable as white though, not necesarily dubious. I'm more used to 4.Bf4 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bb4+ though, but I don't think there's much difference.

White's 4 is KnF3

I agree that 4.Nf3 is the most accurate move against the Budapest, and leads to a significant White advantage.

The truth is, I had no idea you are so old.