I am very curious as to the proficiency of national masters (in general) in various aspects of chess...

Opening: how big/deep is your repertoire? how much time is spent memorizing lines? studying the positions those lines result in? and other opening prep.

Tactics: how proficient are you at recognizing complex tactics OTB? they say chess is 99% tactics, does this still apply at your level? how much time is spent studying tactical problems?

Middle game: how strong? how much emphasis do you put on positional understanding?

endgame: how well do you know and are able to recognize various mating patterns OTB? how much time is spent studying endgame theory?

answers to this (especially from NM's) are greatly appreciated.

Ofcourse, if i have left something out please let me know.

-jason of austin 

re tactics for even a master:

"A lot of the difference between an IM and GM is a seriousness to the game. The GM is willing to go through all this. He's willing to put up with anything. This shows his dedication. One other thing is the GMs superiority in tactics. For example Christiansen can find tactics in any position. If you're a GM you should be able to overpower the IM tactically. The GM will often blow out the IM in this area. " -- Nick de FIRMIAN, in How To Get Better at Chess : Chess Masters on Their Art by GM Larry Evans, IM Jeremy B Silman and Betty Roberts

great quote thank you

that is very interesting.

Any more insight into this good question?

National Masters skill varies from country to country as WGM Pogonina pointed out in a different topic about masters.  For example a national master in Russia would be rated over 2400 FIDE.

A player rated around 2200-2300, which is the range I'm guessing you're talking about, is much better than me, and should fairly easily win 9 out of 10 if not 10/10 games against me.  Still a 2200-2300 player doesn't understand a lot, even if they seem so high.  It would be like a complete beginner asking you to tell him about all the amazing strengths of a B class player -- well it just depends on the player of course!  Some have in depth opening repertoires while others throw out a solid system and try to grind you up with tactics or endgame technique.

Also tactics are still incredibly important, and as goldendog pointed out tactical ability even separates IMs from GMs and run of the mill GMs from the top 10.

OK, thats my plan.  I will throw out a system and try to grind the opponent down with tactics and endgame.   This saves me from learning 90% of openings.

I figure I can play 2000 level just by dropping blunders and waiting for my opponent to make them.  In 90% of my wins the opponent obliges me. Same would go for my losses.  

Their strength is that they beat you up