Openings don't matter till Rank 2000

That's the point.I am not playing highly theoritical lines.....i can even mix up everything and play and no one will be able to beat me in the opening.I get a playable middlegame and all good!

That's my opening mindset, as well.

A lot of players argue about "fighting for the advantage" in the opening. They squabble about move order and centipawns. And I understand the emphasis on precision.

Though, I believe most players can reach success by simply reaching a playable game out of the opening ... then striving to outplay their opponent from there.

Save the centipawn worries for when you reach a higher level.

Mind you, "playable" means different things to different players ...

Aside from the Sicilian Najdorf, which I try to play as precisely as my modest ability allows, this idea of simply trying to reach a playable middle-game is my own philosophy as well.

I add to that "(a playable middle-game)... in which I feel comfortable and confident".

But this is what new players are doing when they memorize

Memorizing 10 moves of a line they will never see is the closest they can come to feeling confident about their opening... to feel comfortable and confident on move 10 requires middlegame study (and experience) which never comes fast, so ironically, new players are following that "comfortable and confident" standard as best they can via practices you're arguing against.

The OP says they studied the opening "just a little" (their exact words). This is of course much better than knowing nothing at all.

Mobilazation,centralization ,King safety and boom playable middlegame.

The OP has been playing chess "for a year now," and thinks he is therefore qualified to put forth sweeping theories about the game. Wow...

He didnt say it was definate.

He was asking for other people's opinions.

I think opening knowlege is very inportant agaisnt cirtain openings such as: 

Pononzi-Stiniez gambit ( can't spell that), Stafford gambit ( I have won a good amount of games for learning the refutaion), Scotch gambit / Italian open (You gotta know d5).

Knowing even the basic mainline is very helpful in these openings.

Nowdays, whenever I face the stafford, im happy becuse my opponent gave me a +2 advantage.

Knowing the lines of some trap openings saves you and punishes those who play it.

Openings do matter in chess at all levels, including below 2000 ELO. However, the impact of openings may be less pronounced at lower levels of play, as players at this level may not have the same level of understanding and experience with specific openings and their related strategies. At lower ELO ratings, players may make more mistakes in their openings, and the impact of these mistakes can be magnified as the game progresses. As such, a solid understanding of basic opening principles, such as controlling the center, developing your pieces, and maintaining king safety, is still important for players at all levels, including those below 2000 ELO. However, it's also important to keep in mind that a player's skill in the middlegame and endgame is often more critical to their success than their opening choice. At lower ELO ratings, players may have a tendency to make positional and tactical errors in the middlegame and endgame, which can be more decisive in determining the outcome of a game. In conclusion, while openings do matter in chess at all levels, including below 2000 ELO, the impact of opening choice may be less pronounced at lower levels of play. It's important to have a solid understanding of basic opening principles, but it's also important to focus on improving your middlegame and endgame skills