chess insights: punishing opponent blunders

"Opportunism:
How often you take advantage of your opponent blunders. 100% means you punish them all, 0% means you counter-blunder them all."

In my analysis I punish 85% of opponent blunders in middlegame, 83% in endgame and just 50% in opening. Is it secure to say I should study more opening?

EDIT::
forgot it... just 2 moves is not enough to decide anything...

I think to assume you do 85% is a vast over estimation. Considering in my opinion, the 85%ers are the strong GMs, 2700+. If I were to say for the average expert like myself, I am probably right around 30-40%. (I have literally tested as a strong master in endgame play from one of my IM trainers. And I can't claim 80%+ in that category.) An average master potentially 40-50%. I once saw a graphic of the amount of information the average players are missing compared to a titled player. He called it fragmentation. And it looked like a disk fragmentation chart. The average class player has many wholes in their knowledge and they learn haphazardly. The closer they get to a GM title the more those gaps fill in. Maybe what you should do is look at your game closer and see where you really stand in taking advantage of mistakes and blunders. Keep in mind that blunders are not just dropping pieces or missing a simple trick. It's also positional, or missing something deep in calculation.

I am working on my openings mostly because I chose something to master. And because I am an average person who works, I went by the "Wait till you're 2000 to study openings" instead of the "Wait till you are 2300-2400".

@MeWantCookieMobile it is not wrong study oppening, the problem is lack of good material of study. Modern study of openings is all about midlegame! We have study typical maneuvers, the best squares for each piece in each variant, some endgame patterns/schemes from opening we choose, typical pawnbreaks, etc... But when we study opening in poor books/articles/etc.., sometimes just moves are showed...

The main objective for study opening is know what to do in midlegame, understanding where the position are going. For example, one can study KIA and from mainlines they can be very confrotable know all trickys, sacrifices, and poor or good positional decisions. The problem is: our opponents know that trickys, sacrifices, and poor or good positional decisions too!

In my experience they generally don't. And even NM's falter. I have an NM that we have played 5 games and all he has managed to obtain from me is a draw. Usually similar openings. Even then I don't catch a high percentage of errors most of the time.