I hate openings

You can also choose openings that don't really need to be known per heart. I learnt the English opening, but nobody play then main variations. I finally learnt this opening playing it, and playing it. Under 2200, you can play without knowing a lot of theory. Or choose an original opening: you will know as theory as your opponent.

For a beginner or intermidiate player openings are not very importhant for only one simple reason. They say don't memorize, know the idea. But how can a low rated player know the idea  even if the opening goes exacly as he planned to (no side lines) if he blunder pieces to simple tactics. He can't create harmony with his pieces and are often blocked by pawns or simply can't make attacking plan... He is often lost and have no clue what to do , no matter his first 5-6 moves are in his memory but then following two are not.. study tactics is the fastest way to improve even way above 1500.

You have to know only opening principles and well known traps. But don't try to play for traps. understand very basic plans with different pawn structures like karo-can (black is solid but often passive) /french (black have bad light squared bishop but can create counter play) and thats absolutely enough for you. I did not know any of that and was already close to 1500. Everyone can reach 1500 if he simply dont blunder pieces.

Thats right Aim.  The 1st tournament I played in I didn't know openings. I was black, and the guy played the fried liver on me. I lost that game but should have definitely won it.

I didn't know it, so lost my rook to his knight, I still should have won though, even after that. In the end game I could have queened my pawn before him, And I had a knight, and I was about to move and touched it. He jumped up and said you touched it you have to move it. I was planning on moving it anyway, but it flustered me and I moved it to the wrong square so I couldn't take his promoted pawn. He had a queen then, but if I had moved my knight to the square I was intending. I would have won, because there wouldn't have been a way for him to stop me from queening then. That was also his last pawn.

After the game the guy went around bragging to everyone how he beat me. I felt  pretty sorry for the guy because he wasn't really that good. He was also pretty old. That was my first tournament game, lol.

Yeah you don't just set a trap without thinking about following positions. Otherwise it might be you that gets trapped.

I think everyone playing chess seriously has ever get a Fried Liver or at least Italian Game with one of the colors.

Studying chess (openings) is like memorizing policical speeches in another language.

Unless you're trying to become a pro I don't see any reason to study anything. The game doesn't become more fun the better you become as long as you're playing equal strength opponents. In fact I noticed the more complex game become less fun I get as I have to think way harder, and I hate to think.

Just a personal opinion.

Thats completely... truth. The more better you get, the more frustrated you get and less and almost no fun at all.

Remember the days where you did not know much, maybe some opening trap etc, but every game was adventure , yes full of blunders maybe, but at the end it was a lot of fun when you grab your opponent free queen or you checkmate the king. You play whatever you like, however you like and you can still win. That was great. But at higher you go you cant play whatever you like.. you play to win with all that knowledge and experience you have and often that does not happen or if does is not fun at all and you often lose in a bad way.

Thats why for more than half year i enjoy playing unrated vs lower rated whatever i want and to have fun with the game.

Until you play what looks like a reasonable opening development move and fall into one of the many "traps" and lose quickly.

Openings have generally been a weakness for me too.

Play chess960. No opening theory. Think for yourself from move 1.

I love openings, but I love them too much.  I often become fascinated with a new opening when I should instead study endgames and practice tactics.

Me too! I still can't enjoy endgames!

I get the best feeling when I can display my opening knowledge and milk the advantage after it.

You definitely shouldn't totally ignore them. It is vital to know opening principals, that includes the pawn structures that come from them.

Also the numerous tactics that are available in them. If you can't make it through the opening stages of the game, your end game, and middle game knowledge is totally useless.

Thanks for all the wonderful posts!!! Knowing all aspects of the game does help, but you only really need openings to get to the mid-game and endgame in a reasonably good position. About two of three games do go a good distance (40 moves plus?). When I started chess at 52, I used to love tactics, but changed over the last 10 years. The fastest jump I had in rating was 100 points immediately after I took a half hour endgame course using Chess Master. That was the last I really studied the game except in passing. Would recommend a short endgame course to everyone if you want to get better quick with little effort.

All of the strategical ideas and positional manuevers in chess is just as interesting as the tactics.

But I just can't enjoy endgames.

I studied openings just a little bit now and I'm around 1600 on anything over 10 minutes, and USCF 1647 over the board, but getting a good bullet rating still alludes me. I think those who are good at openings have a tremendous advantage on short time games, but not on the longer games.