So basically, my opening move would be classed as 'other' but really it is one of 1.d4, 1.e4, 1.c4 in terms of the classifications of this post.
So basically, my opening move would be classed as 'other' but really it is one of 1.d4, 1.e4, 1.c4 in terms of the classifications of this post.
I think it'd be interesting to try to combine all possible paths for an opening into a single count, but that would probably be complicated if multiple openings can be reached through the same path. (e.g., which opening would the shared path be assigned to?)
As an overall guide I think what you have done is fine, but I suspect something in the order of 10-20% of games might be subject to transpositions where the opening move isn't an accurate categorization.
1. Players who want to play Queen's Pawn opening but avoid certain lines in them start in an English instead.
2. Players who want to play Queen's Pawn or English openings but avoid certain lines in them start with 1. Nf3 instead.
For example, just after White plays 1.Nf3, the game is classified as A04, but after 1...d5 2.d4, it's now officially a D02, over in the Queen's Pawn category, just as it would have been if the game had started 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3.
Databases usually keep track of chess openings played by ECO code rather than by specific moves, exactly so that these transpositions are handled smoothly.
Popularity has not a lot to do with the openings themselves but with other things like a good book being published, or a popular match (like WC).
Another thing you have is that some variations are really popular, and have good results, but are at one point refuted by a single game. As a result of this, the variation dies. but remains to have very good statistics.