I've noticed that I am ending up into late middlegame / early endgame positions which are relatively equal. I would like to know if there are any books that deal with this topic. I find that I try to do too much, and end up blowing the game.

i also have very hardtimes with endgames, if i can't checkmate before it happens - i will mostly blunder.
At least - i know my problem. You could read all the theory you want - it will not help you if you do not correct your problem on the board first.

You said it yourself ''i find that i try too much''  I was also trying to find unusual surprise move... that came back in my face 5 moves later

Endgames and tactics Book helped me a lot, but they would've done nothing if i didnt correct my need to try too much everygame.

You may try to attack his weak squares as aggressively as possible. That will really help to win a pawn or even a piece. However, play carefully or you will lose instead..

There are a few books that discuss the transition from the middlegame to the endgame - in fact, I think there is one with the title "From the middlegame into the endgame".  It teaches how and when to transfer to an endgame, and when not to.

The point where the opening ends, and you find yourself in the middlegame quagmire, is the entire point of the literature on both tactics and strategy.

I assume you've got at least a solid, elementary understanding of tactics, to be at the level you're at.  So you need to dip into strategy.

Somebody old and famous described tactics as "what to do when there's something to do," and strategy as "what to do when there's nothing do do."

Some popular resources (they may or may not be the best, but they're popular, so there's something to them, by God):

Silman's Reassess your Chess books.  These definitely have a more positional angle to them.

Nimzo's My System.  Similar, just with a different take.

Bronstein's Zurich 1953.  Probably the most popular annotated game collection annotated by a great positional player.

Vukovic's Art of Attack.  This gets clumped in with tactics books, which is a shame, because it's clearly a middlegame book.  How to look at a middlegame position and find an attack, even if it's not immediately obvious.  (The drawback, of course, is that there isn't always one there...but if you're attack-minded, a study of this, in combination with Silman, will keep you entertained for months.)

Tal's "Life and Games of" collection.  Probaby the most popular annotated game collection annotated by a great attacker.

 

If you're a positional player (or hope to be), maybe time to start with Silman or Nimzo, plus the Zurich book.

If you're an attacker (or hope to be), one of Silman or Nimzo, plus Vukovic, plus Tal.

---

good advice.

Thank you all for the good advice.

"what to do when there's something to do," and strategy as "what to do when there's nothing do do."

So true - Nice quote.

You only work on your strategy when you have nothing else to do.

You might want to also consider the idea of "picking the path you're less sure of" when you're not playing for any stakes.

In other words, in club/practice games, ALWAYS have your compass pointing towards moves leading to uncertainty and doubt when things look boring/dull.

For instance, if you have two candidates A and B in a mostly equal position, where you know A continues to make things dry and B leaves you feeling unsure => pick B. You'll learn a whole lot more about and get a better feel for this kind of a position in future games (where'll you be more sure about moves like B)

A good positional player can often do a lot to try to grind the opponent down in equal positions, especially if the game is not simplfied, whether it's quiet or not. Working on strategy can get you better at this sort of thing.

I'm assuming you don't mean a dynamic kind of equality, when both sides have a lot of different chances, because playing for a win there shouldn't be much of a problem.

You need to show patience and slowly try to improve your position, and create weaknesses, only getting too aggressive when the opponent has left some openings with imprecise moves.

I don't agree that you should always look for unclear moves if you don't want to. Sometimes a tactical move is good, sometimes it's not. It all depends on the position whether you're creating excellent practical chances or you're just weakening your own position. You have to figure out how many practical chances a move gives you yourself and see if there are safer ways to improve your position as well and decide upon the ones with the most chances or the most promising.

 The "ends justify the means" argument that it will improve your game is interesting but I don't really think it's necessary to play moves you feel are wrong in the hopes of learning something (and I think that's very unclear, and anyways, let's face it, we want to win games! You can both learn and win sometimes ). You can always go over GM games who "do it right" and check with a computer for any opportunities you missed. That way you're looking for correctness, not complications at all cost. There are many options for how one can play and improve.