Ditto to all the comments about a low-rated player playing Sicilians and Kings Indian: Those are openings for pros who are going all out on memorization in hope of catching their opponent making a single mistake in a sharp opening where every move is critical for survival. Positional considerations in such openings are few, so it's difficult for a player to learn chess well from such openings. It's like a beginning driver buying a Ferrari: the driver will just end up wrapping it around a tree. In a sharp opening the beginner will just lose every game against a higher rated player versed in those openings. I used to play such openings because I was a fan of Fischer, then I got tired of losing and memorizing so I switched to more sane openings where I could at least draw once in a while with higher rated players.
Also, there is a slight discrepancy in your repertoire: d4 openings tend to be classical, slow, positional, and strategic, whereas the other openings you mentioned are all sharp, fast, and tactical. I'd recommend first answering the following questions before choosing a repertoire that is self-consistent: (1) Are you playing for a win, or rather a draw, especially against a higher rated player, especially as Black? (2) Do you prefer the classical approach or rather the hypermodern approach? (3) How much memorization are you willing to do? (4) What are your realistic long-term aspirations in chess? (Don't say "grandmaster" if you are starting after as an adult.)
Wait soo are you saying the begginer is worse than his opponents by saying that the better player will always win?
Just Do It! Amd add the Triple Lindy systems!!