specialization is for insects

I was one of those who tried to learn as less openings as possible, and memorizing the most moves possibles on those few.

Reality of chess hit me hard, when I realize there's no way you can be prepared for every weird move your opponent throws at you (either by not knowing theory, or intentionally) even in your own repertoire. And even if you do, in most case you'll have passed the opening stages but with little to no advantage. You can't expect to win in the opening.

Probably there's a secret desire to learn the magic opening and racking up some quick win everytime the opponent dares to not know/follow theory. E.g. sicilian players who gets pissed off by 2.Bc4 and would like it to lose immediately.

I reckon I'm around 1700 OTB. (my chess.com ratings are lower because I don't play seriously online). I would like to get at 2000 asap. My idea is that studying opening theory for ALL the openings will improve my positional understanding and strategic vision. I want to study openings because I think they'll make me a better chess player: a well rounded chess player able to deal with any situation on the board, even the most odd. From each opening you can take some positional concepts, some themes, some common plans...that will make you improve strategically.

It might appear daunting to try to study everything. But the more you learn the more you find similarities and things in common in different openings, so studying one helps you understanding the others. E.g. the French, the Caro-Kann advanced, and the Alapin sicilian do have something in common and studying one will help you understand the others.

In sum: I believe to become a good chess player you need to study and understand all the openings.

Rather than studying openings, I prefer to study formations.

The Caro-Slav family, the French formation, the IQP family, etc.

This is an interesting improvement strategy. I've done it myself a few years ago and it helped improve my play. Then I specialized again. But it's good for your chess development. Keep us posted.

While I don't think this is a bad idea, you won't get to 2000 by studying openings unless you are studying complete games, tactical themes, endgame ideas, etc. Openings, as you point out, aren't a magic bullet that rack up points but rather a means to a playable position where hopefully you will understand some of the plans you can use.