When should I do Castling?


Don't castle when the King will not be safe after castling. Castling is to keep the King safe, so castle if there is no attack on the wing you are gonna castle.
The only correct answer to your question is: "It depends".
There is no Universal truth about it.
P.S. Avoid long castling if you don't know what you're doing.
Why would long castling (or casting queenside) be any worse than castling kingside? Whichever side becomes available and convenient should generally be all right.
Why would long castling (or casting queenside) be any worse than castling kingside? Whichever side becomes available and convenient should generally be all right.
In long castling, your King is less safe, and you often need to waste a move to make it safer (Kb1 or Kb8). If you look at GM games, you'll see they do play that Kb1/Kb8 move almost every thim they long castle. And they know when to do it, if it's really needed, etc.
As a beginner, long castling exposes you to more devastating attacks (or counter attacks).
Finally, you can search and find stats that shows what % of games have short castling, what % have long, and what % have none, and see the success chances aswell.
Obviously if you need to make moves that give you more grief to castle then this is already covered be our previous advice on castling, focus on making good moves, and let castling be one of them. Ideally one side should be easier than another just on the merits of the game clear even at that level, (if they have more pieces attacking one side, then castling there is probably riskier, if you have an open castle on one side first, it's likely easier, etc.) It doesn't cover every scenario, but it's a starting point to make castling decisions and refine your calls on them. Now, you're point on more devastating attacks is interesting, but we are talking about sub 1000 play here, is this the kind of thing they should actually be worried about? I'm not saying you're wrong by the way, I just wanted some clarification. Did you have any examples in mind for the sub 1000 playing field? And if I'm missing your point on this obviously feel free to clarify.
@catmaster I replied to your question, and won't bother read an other confusing and confused "talking to yourself" text where a weaker player tries to teach a stronger player.
I have not tried to teach you anything about chess in any thread today, that would be silly. If you don't have any clarification to give on your comments here, then so be it.
It's not necessarily long castling itself that is a problem (if the king is prudently shuffled to b) but that often it results in opposite side castling which I guess was being implied. In this position both players can pawn storm their opponent without undermining their king's safety. The game can turn into a pawn race to soften up defences, and pieces follow.

In this puzzle the answer to your question is "on the 2nd move" (White to move, mate in 2)
this puzzle the answer to your question is "on 2nd move".
It's not necessarily long castling itself that is a problem (if the king is prudently shuffled to b) but that often it results in opposite side castling which I guess was being implied. In this position both players can pawn storm their opponent without undermining their king's safety. The game can turn into a pawn race to soften up defences, and pieces follow.
That's certainly a valid point. I don't think I put enough thought into how that difference in the game could be more difficult at that level. I was thinking more along the lines of some kind of advanced piece attacks, which didn't seem as plausible at that range, but pawn pressure in the late game is definitely a thing there.

It's not necessarily long castling itself that is a problem (if the king is prudently shuffled to b) but that often it results in opposite side castling which I guess was being implied. In this position both players can pawn storm their opponent without undermining their king's safety. The game can turn into a pawn race to soften up defences, and pieces follow.
Another point worth mentioning is that it is easier to attack than to defend, in a number of respects.
First, the defender is under more psychological pressure than the attacker; and secondly the attacker can better afford an inaccurate move than the defender can. A small error by the attacker might blunt the edge of his initiative, while a similar small error by the defender might be immediately fatal.
So at the lower levels... let's say, 800 to 1200 rating... opposite side castling and competing Pawn storms will tend to favor the player who is quickest to exploit his chances, while at the upper levels of the game the side with the sounder position is more likely to succeed, opposite side castling or not.

In this puzzle the answer to your question is "on the 2nd move" (White to move, mate in 2)
this puzzle the answer to your question is "on 2nd move".
Qe3
Qe3 is incorrect, as black plays Rxd3

In this puzzle the answer to your question is "on the 2nd move" (White to move, mate in 2)
this puzzle the answer to your question is "on 2nd move".
Literally a mate in 3, not in 2. I think every single mate is a king move, amusingly.
Mate in two is possible. I needed a hint to solve this, which is in the title of this thread.

As a followup to my previous answer, I decided to create a video for you to show you when I personally think is the good time to castle, while also showing why castling the king too early, could prove to be bad.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rm43irVGPOU