I gave up depending on my skills only so i went to a forum here on chess.com that talked about the subject and found a couple books that like and so far so good. Won a couple games right out the gate due to one of the books and only partly read 2 chapters.
The books made it easier. I knew what do but not sure why... now it leaves me more relaxed when i get to the end game.
I think the difference between master and normal skill player is throughout the game. On every move. 
The heart of the game is in the Middle Game. Now with all the info a player can maintain a balance against a stronger player in the opening with a couple of reviews from a few sources. Get them to the middle game and now they have to think on their own.
With the End Game again so many books and examples of it. And if your behind against and equally skilled player you are going to start to hope for a blunder or mistake.
Well, I generally think that the endgame is where the master really tends to shine.
At chess.com that is where you have to put on your track sneakers and chase the king all over the board. I never had to do that at another site plus here they are real good at it. Hiding behind pawns in a lost situation like a little boy hiding behind his mom holding on to her legs.
You should develop your calculating skill, the tactics are one of the important elements in the middlegame. And you should become good in planning. Planning skill are very important in the middlegame.
I like to call it Chess Boxing.
Survivor, on youtube there's a very instructing playlist of middle game training. To me this was very usefull and therefore I highly recommended to you, if you really want to improve your middle game.
Here's the link to the playlist (Majnu Middlegame training):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rk47zfq788M&list=PLC1283332FD485C40
Thanks.
thanks for answers.
The positions with a closed center have the most straightforward plan - attack on the side where you have more space, by undermining the opponent's pawn chain with the respective pawn break. Those are the strategically easiest positions.
Positions with an open center would require more thinking about specific lines' and central squares' control, initiative, and would be more difficult to analyze in terms of calculation too. But there is a general rule to centralize your pieces, and if you have the initiative - look for an attack, otherwise defend and seek counterplay against undefended pieces, pawn weaknesses, a king that lacks protection, etc.
In semi-closed positions usually the plan is to get control over central outposts and place pieces there then look for an attack, or to push pawns in the center if you have more of them and can advance them favorably.
There are however many books about middlegame planning that look at different types of positions and how to play them. I would recommend you "Pawn Structure Chess" by IM (now GM) Andrew Soltis, and "Шахматный учебник" - Виктор Пожарский ("Chess textbook" by FM Viktor Pozharsky) if you know Russian or can get a translation of that great book.
for example this is my game against crafty that i played it now.>>>players with more than 1800 rate<<<.please help and say my wrong moves(please analyse it)
thanks
This opening choice gives you control over central dark squares (d4, e5), but you're weak on light squares (d5, e4) where, on the contrary, Black is stronger, and those are the squares that could become outposts in the middlegame. Your plan could be placing a knight on e5 (or a pawn - with an f2-f3 then e2-e4, ...dxe4, fxe4, e4-e5 idea which could give you a semi-open f file too), gaining kingside space (by pushing the f/g/h pawns) and attacking Black's king. Black's play could be undermining your center (ideally at e4/c3 by playing ...cxd4 or ...b5-...b4, but a frontal break as ...e5 with or without ...f6 is possible although not so favorable) looking to open lines. Since you didn't go for a strong pawn center from the opening (you have only one central pawn pushed), Black has his share of center control and could play for a kingside attack too (center control or a closed center is important when attacking in order to make a possible counterattack difficult), but it's more natural for Black to play on the queenside if he's looking for a win - opening the center would most likely result in a symmetrical pawn structure and drawish positions.
What happened in the game? Black played ...c5 which was strategically good to undermine d4, and you played c2-c4 which attacks d5 but doesn't lead to an attack but rather to liquidation and an equal position - namely the exchanges from 10...dxc4 to 14.Kxg2 and the position after that (maybe c2-c3 with the idea of recapturing cxd4 to maintain center control would have been better). After move 15 you were already in an endgame, and your opponent won due to better technique. Maybe you should have tried to stay in the middlegame a little longer and try to go for a kingside attack or try to gain some advantage before simplifying into an endgame - in such a case you should have tried to put more pressure on Black before opening lines and exchanging material.
I like to call it Chess Boxing.
Chess boking is an actual sport. Look it up on wikipedia. I think it's good for the brick sh!thouse with a softer, more tactical side. :D
*thank you Glex for answer*
but i think playing against strong engine like crafty need forecast your future move(position) and also computer,s future possible moves because computer doesnt play like a human.it choose every time the best move.in playing against human perhaps it shouldnt be necessary to forecast opponent,s future moves but when playing against engine its so important to do this.
but i played this game 10min and i just concentrated on my moves not computer,s future possible moves(positions).
More often than not, middlegame play is governed by the central pawn structure. There are a limited number of viable strategies for either side associated with each particular structure. The middlegame often revolves around players attempting to pursue their chosen plans while simultaneously trying to thwart the opponent's.
If you find yourself without a plan or a clue as to how to develop one as you enter the middlegame, it means you do not understand the pawn structure you have helped erect.
true.i have this problem(pawn structure) but how can i getting it better?!
My system, by Nimzowitch. That is the chess bible. To understand modern strategy, you will have to go through history. In 1850, the best strategy was:
Get your pieces out, sacrifice something to gain more piece activity, hope that there is a mate. If not, resign.
In 1900, Steinitz came and said: You must attack if you have the advantage, if you don't have the advantage, an attack can NEVER be succesfull. He played the first game with a bishop against a knight where he took the outposts from the knight and won.
The Nimzowitch, in the book you will se EVERYTHING.
And so on. After you see Kasparov and Anand, you will be ready to crush people with 2300 rating (if you do 10 minutes tactics training every day)
It's true that middlegame ideas in chess are a more or less limited number and that there are very good historical examples of appropriate play in certain types of positions. There's not much innovation in terms of strategy, so it's good to learn to recognize the basic pawn structure types (classified mainly according to the center formation) and to learn both sides' main (and some of the side-) plans in those types. Check this site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pawn_structure, it's a resume of Andrew Soltis' "Pawn Structure Chess". Although the site lacks the positional analysis, game examples and general thoroughness from the book, it's still informational and useful especially if you're not looking for something specific in-depth.
I think the difference between master and normal skill player is in middle game and sometimes in endgame.but i want to know how can i improve my middle game skill?sometimes i encounter some close positions that i cant decide in that positions therfore i move my piece random.you can look at my topics(my games against crafty)to know how my middle game is weak
question: how can we improve our middle game skill?