Study vs Play

Which one of the above mentioned is considered to give you the advantage over your opponent?

Both are important if i lock myself and study 24/7 I will not have expierence and if i play 24/7 i won't learn much new

Study - practice tactics problems.

I think study simply because it encompasses analysis of your games.

If you keep playing and not recognising where you're going wrong you may keep making the same mistakes.

If you suck, study - it will keep your rating from going down

since you can't lose if you don't play.

Similarly, if you are great, play - otherwise there is no way to increase your rating.

And we all know that rating points are worth love and money!

I think a more salient question is: How much time should you devote to each?

I think at the OP's level, you'd want to do a little bit of study on the basics, and then play a lot of games (nothing shorter than about G10 though).

I agree with tactics but the fried liver /lolli attack is so stupid whats next ? Parhram ?

What's stupid about the Lolli attack? It's one of the best scoring openings in master chess.

It doesn't follows a chess principle and it can be avoided with

Italian Game, Two Knights Defense, Ulvestad Variation

The Ulvestad varation gives black a fine game and avoids fried liver or loli attack

O and I forgot to tell you did you look the database when the last time the loli attack was played ?

http://chesstempo.com/game-database.html  8 games in database

1999-11-04

Chess.com database 28 games last time played

2004

Practice is the same on Study. Both will help you to your improvement.

every person is different

however it's OTB play that makes you better , and the possibility of playing is often limited (work/clubs/tournaments/...) so the question is often resolved

Please don't look at my online rating but at my live my live standart rating is 1507. And such attacks don't work much. I rather practice the opening I play then play something that I will never try at OTB and die in flames. Its an hope opening you must hope your that your opponent  blunder/mistake to win if he doesn't your screwed. As i told I rather play sound openings , get an playable position and that will be enough. I do not care about such attacks. The fried liver/ loli brakes a chess principle

Do not move a piece twice in the opening unless there is a tactic.

I can't play the fried liver because onions don't come with it. ;-)

Whats perfect in it ? Break a chess principle and hopefully get away with it ? The thing isn't fun there nothing educational . Belove master level every opening is playable but why I should make my life harder and play things like this. I made a strong decision to polish my chess principles and I won't break my decision for some hope attack like that

And your 2 shown games. What you want to prove ? Those white players

Nakamura, Hikaru  and Short, Nigel D

Are really strong players. They can play what they want.

For me it seems that study is much better than playing. I am now transitioning from playing often and studying little, to study often and play a little. Even in the middle of my transition now, where I probably play-study equal time, I see a huge improvement. I recently read a claim that the average Grandmaster studies about 80% to 20% playing. So for every game, about 4 hours, he would study 16 hours. That is huge!

All study and no play makes you have no opponent.