Is this Repertoire score me a minimum of 7.5/9 in U1600 ?

@wonderquestioniqtest

It's more like this:

Imagine you dedicate hundreds of hours in training to learning the French Defense. You know how to copy Grand Master moves all the way up to move 25! You know a bunch of different main lines, and even a few traps. All these GMs are playing all these same lines a lot. Surely this will mean that you have some major advantage in the game since you did all that opening preparation.

Opponent 1: They play 1.d4 Well that french training isn't going to help you so much now is it? It's now pretty much useless. You will play against this a lot. Get use to it.

Alright on to your next guy...

Opponent 2: This guy opens up with 1.e4, yes yes yes! you can now play your beloved french 1...e5 he is yours now! 2... Nf3 ahhh that is a rarely used line you didn't study that is actually fairly sound. Oh well all that french knowledge is out the window now. Your on your own yet again you didn't study this line of the french.

Alright next game...

Opponent 3: 1.e4 1...e6 2.d4 ya baby here comes that french you been waiting for hell ya here it comes! that training is finally gonna pay off... 2...d5 and here comes 3.Bd3 NOOOOO that's not the french studied for. Your opponent did not play your much anticipated Nd2 or Nc3. You are already out of book on move 3, and this could be a very sharp line. Oh well, there goes your prep you hope that your common french move responses are not a trap they may be. This is scary.

next game...

Opponent 4. This guy plays the opening just how you seen in the GM games. They play the strongest moves you know. You are not really better off here. They are playing the most common GM moves that you recognize. You fail to get a winning advantage out of the opening because of this. Your onto the middle and endgame now. Better hope he didn't study those more.

next game...

Opponent 5. This guy plays the French like you have always hoped for, he even falls into a common opening trap. Out of all these opponents this is the only time you have gained a small advantage because of your studying. However this player does not simply resign because you have an extra pawn. They put much more study into middle game, and endgame than you did. Do you know how to convert your advantage?

next...

Opponent 6. 1.e4 1...e6 yay french again! 2.f4 What is this!? they trying to play like this is a kings gambit! I know the good kings gambit response here because the knight can not stop the check I'll play 2...Qh4+ here now I will show him what's what! oh wait he plays 3.g3 3...Qd8 Well that didn't go so well. They now have a really nice advantage.

My point is when you study openings many rarely come up. At that level it's far far far more important to learn simply "opening principle" instead of "openings"

Having good opening principles helps a lot more than memorizing some lines from some GM games. It's also much easier to study. Here are some of the principles:

1) Control the center
2) Castle
3) Moves pieces once unless threatened
4) Do not attack until you are ready
5) Try not to move the queen too soon
6) Protect your pieces
7) Connect the rooks
8) Don't hang pieces

If you're not the guy that goes 7.5 out of 9, then who? Just own it. Good luck.

I used to study openings quite a bit when I was younger. Then I noticed some players that were twice as strong as I, who barely ever looked at openings. They were studying tactics and endings.

What a waste of time (on my part)

chess is a game of small edges. sure, big blunders might happen, but in general a game should go through the accumulation of small advantages, which results in better odds to win the game.

the opening is the first step in the accumulation of these small advantages. i believe that, in the opening, your aim should be to steer the game towards somewhere you know what to do, while maintaining a sound position.

there seems to be this general common sense opinion that "opening study" is the memorization of variations. obviously, doing that doesn't make a lot of sense, specially at the lower levels, where deviations are the norm rather than the exception.

i always thought of "opening study" as learning the general ideas, then playing some real games to see how they work in practice/how opponents might deviate. after the games, i check why my ideas didn't work and if the opponents' deviations can be "punished" (that is, comparing with theory and trying to understand the points).
so not only i learn a lot about the reasoning behind certain move orders, but also a lot on how to play the resulting middlegames. it has worked for me, at least.

now well, regarding your actual repertoire, there's nothing outright dumb or unsound, specially considering the level of the tournament.
so obviously, if you "don't lose winning positions and/or equal positions", that means you should never lose and then 7.5/9 is possible :D

however, while the lines individually are fine, i don't see the common themes or pawn structures that unite your choice of lines. it seems that you are a "sharp" player so you might want to reconsider your pirc approach, as an example.

I am a really sharp player ( why would I play Traxler while being positional ) but some nerds know playing Nxf7 and Don't take the bishop with Kf1, they will get an advantage. I analysed deep into 30 moves or so. There is advantage for white in the Nxf7 line but if white accepts the B sac and 7.Ke3.

Pirc approach can generate h4-h5 attack.
Thanks.

@lurarose
First, if that wasn't copy/pasta, and you took the time to write all that as a response, thanks it's an entertaining comment lol. It also presents a strong case for your side, however there are some counter points I definitely want to raise.
Your scenario presents an exaggerated skewed version of how people would actually try to learn openings so it's somewhat of a straw man. For starters, I don't know too many people would spend that much time and put all of their eggs into one basket on just one opening, because of the very danger that your scenario illustrates. What you do instead, is to create an opening repertoire so you have a plan against 1. e4 but you also have something for 1. d4 or 1. Nf3 etc.. and the variations. You can't memorize all lines of every opening move, but you can at least learn a few moves for each of the main lines of the most serious openings.
Since time is finite, just like when you are playing a game of chess it's crucial to manage your time. So you must decide how much of your valuable time you are willing to devote to improving in chess you will allot to practicing, preferably long games, post game analysis, tactics training, studying grand master games and learning openings. You see already what we're talking about now is something completely different than the picture you painted.
Furthermore, it's imperative that while you are studying openings you are not just memorizing moves but learning the ideas behind the moves AT THE SAME TIME. There is a reason why the mainline is the mainline and any book or video on chess openings worth its salt will go into the reasons and ideas behind the moves. This point so important I'm going to say this again for emphasis. If you study openings PROPERLY it's a very efficient use of your time because you are not only getting the benefit of confidence and time saving, which will be useful later on in the game, when mainlines are played, which is VERY FREQUENT, but in the process of having studied and acquired this knowledge your understanding of of the principles behind the moves through practical application, which is the best way to learn should have improved as well.
At the end of your post you gave 8 opening principles and you said an easier way to go would be to just study those principles. Yes, it's so easy to learn those basic principles I'd say that every non-beginner player, by definition, already knows all those 8, and more! So then what? Hmmmm. If we're going to go by what you say then how do all of us players who are not beginners hope to advance our chess because, trust me, we already know these things.
One last point. It seems to me the chess world is very hypocritical. I say this because every time in the forums whenever anyone asks about learning openings he gets and automatic avalanche of "DON"T LEARN OPENINGS". Yet even at my level, 1800-1900 lichess, when I'm playing games my opponents are banging out the first few opening moves so quickly that it's very obvious they have them already memorized and are not calculating right from the opening position every time. So it must be a case of do as I say , not as I do? Hmmmm.

"Is this Repertoire score me a minimum of 7.5/9 in U1600 ? " This is already the wrong question: the repertoire is not going to score anything. Original poster has obviously spent a lot of time mastering the Traxler and the Marshall, two heavily analysed openings with lots of theory. If he had spent that same time and effort studying endgames and middle game tactics he probably already would be beyond U1600. It is quite possible that he does not face one single Traxler or Marshall in his 9 games. As he says himself, in his previous tournament he lost 3 games from winning positions. That looks like some priority to work on. Also original poster plays a lot of bullet and variants. That is no advantage either for his upcoming tournament.

I didn't take chess seriously before May 2017 so I couldn't be beyond 1600. And I played two slow OTB tournaments since then.
I took a break at 2016 August because of high school exams and didn't play for 8-9 months. I started to study seriously after the break.

Playing slow chess on internet is kind of boring to me. I'm not patient if not OTB. Bullet Highly prevents Zeitnots. In the tournament that I lost 3 games in won positions I was in Zeitnot in all 3. Then I started to play bullet. It's good for trying openings and think fast.

I get it that online is not suitable for long games, but bullet grows bad habits. What works in bullet does not work over the board. I grant that blitz is some good to train playing in time trouble and is some good to get acquainted with openings but that is about it. If you get into time trouble, it is because you procrastinate or cogitate too much in the middle game. I would not say that blitz prevents time trouble. I do not believe in bullet or variants being helpful in any way.