opening frustration

 Nope, I frequently open up poorly and equally frequently win afterwards.

Opening theories are very important for players who prefer sharp and tactical plays. For those who have good endgame techniques and prefer simplified positions (like Capa) then openings do not matter.

 A real life example would be my friend. I have played with him (Russian 60+ year old) who has a solid and positional style. He opens with 1.e4. Against sicilian he plays 1.e4 2.c5 3. c4. And against 1....e5 he plays the ruy lopez exchange variation.

 Not cutting edge and according to theory an equal position and in some variations he plays a "passive but solid" position. But it doesn't matter to him. He doesn't know a lot of opening variations like I do. heck I can remember more. But the results are the same.

 His strategy will be to simplify and then go to an equal ending. If he managed to do just that out of 10 games he will beat me 7 out of 10 (3 will end in a draw). ( But if he make a mistake and let me attack him then thats another story.)

In some games I will be left strecthing my head wondering where I have gone wrong.  BTW he has an ELO of 1800++ 

Then you're playing weak players. If your openings are poor, then you are most likely entering the middlegame at a disadvantage (assuming that your opponents are not equally poor). The fact that your opponent(s) blunder their advantage away does not prove that openings aren't important.

Wrong. It's not a matter of opinion, and every titled player in the world would disagree with you. The purpose of the opening is to get the player into an equal middlegame position (in other words, a position in which the player is not at a disadvantage).

Whoever said this to you is probably a weak player. Even at lower levels, openings are still important. What I would suggest is picking one opening for White and playing it game after game after game until you are comfortable with it. As Black, you should pick one defense for e4 and one for d4 and, again, stick with it until you are comfortable. This will cut down on your study time tremendously rather than trying to play 30 different openings which nobody, other than professional players, has time to do.

the question is how much to know and how to define "good positions".

What is a position to play to?

Slight advantage (what is advantage? Believe me assessment of advantage can change as time goes by)? Equal position? Positions played before? Positions you are comfortable in (again how to define comfortable )? 

 How much to study?

 I believe it all boils down to ambition. If you want to become a master and a professional chess player then every phase of your game is important. But you need to know the mainlines because you need every ounce of advantage you can find.

 But if chess is just a game....then enjoy whatever aspects of chess that is special to you.  Be it opening, middlegame or whatever it may be.

 What openings and defenses would you (or anyone) recommend?  There is far too much theory out there for a beginner or novice to haphazardly pick up a book and just start somewhere...  I understand Nimsowitsch's book (My System) to be the first and still the best book on chess strategy but obviously not the only book.  with everything out there, Sicilian, Indian, Queens Gambit etcetra and so forth where should one begin...  and, just to be on the safe side lets say top five openings and defenses...  and if anyone is feeling extremely generous with their time perhaps they might even enlighten some of us lesser players as to why they consider their choices better than other available choices...  

This is the post I posted at kurtgodden blog 

To choose an opening depends on 

 1. Your chess ambition. How far do you want to go in chess? If you are happy at the same level or even don't mind if your playing level decrease and don't care about improvement , then any opening will do. I guess there are life outside chess. 

However, if you want to become a professional chess player one day and a grandmaster the next and one day hopefully you can become world champion, then openings theories are very important. Which one should you choose, I guess the mainstream cutting edge theory. It can be 1.e4 or 1.d4. Scilian or french to meet 1.e4. NI and QI to meet 1.d4

 2. Time and memory. If you don't have BOTH time and a good memory then you  choose one of the quieter variation. You don't have to play 1. g3 or something similar but both 1.e4 and 1.d4 have lots of variations that are less theory intensive.

 3. What kind of player are you? This is a difficult question to answer. Why? Because chess players can evolve. They don't have one style that presists throughout their whole life.

Nonetheless, if you prefer solid position and is an endgame technican then you can avoid opening theory  and play something safe. If you prefer sharp positions, then unfortunately you have to go for more theory-laden stuff opening variations.

 Again, both 1.e4 and 1.d4 offers both styles plenty of variations to choose from.

 4. What materials do you have? What books do you have or have access to?  What budget do you have?

I think no. 4 is the most important factor for me. The access to books and good materials influence my openings more than 1-3. 

 Hope this helps !

I don't think anyone is arguing that the study of openings isn't important.  I think  when serious openings study is appropriate is the real question.  Most coaches, experts etc. put more emphasis on endgames and middlegames for novice players because studying tactics and positions lay the groundwork for understanding openings, and it's only then do players really understand why one line works better than the other.  Most experts want to avoid having novice players simply memorizing lines and playing them mechanically, only to be lost when their opponent leaves the book and middlegame begins.   

Whether or not there's truth to that is another matter, and I'm certainly not experienced enough to give a definitive opinion, but it seems to make sense to me.

 I saw no books on 1.e4 or 1.d4 (or simply e4 or d4 for that matter)  could you perhaps be a bit more speciific...  

 I found books on Sicilian,  French (Advance and variations), Nimzo-Indian (which is what I am assuming you meant by NI), and Queens Indian...  would others agree that these are good starting points?

Porterism, that's a good point. The absolute beginner shouldn't be overly-concerned about anything until he/she first learns about basic strategy and tactics. Once he/she starts playing around the 1200 level (which shouldn't be hard at all), then it's time to start cracking the books.