How can I understand if the attack is premature?

Hi everyone,

How can I understand if the attack is premature and how can I calculate the tactic to implement it at the right time?

It often happens that I start an attack on the opponent's king and often it ends:
- with the enemy king running away
- a useless exchange of materials (ending other times for me losing material)
- after the exchange of the pieces (or escape of the opponent's king) I simply scattered my pieces without concluding anything, losing a solid position

How can I become a better planer in that situation? (Talking about middlegame and developement, not about learning opening trap attacks with 10 or less move patterns)

That is a problem that everyone faces.   You play mostly 10 minute games.  It is very hard to have enough time to calculate our multiple variations when the whole game lasts only 20 minutes.   Are you relying on your gut feel assessment?   You need to try to make some quick calculations.  You can't do the same level as you would do in a slow game but you have enough time to at least make some basic calculations.

Do you find yourself running out of time?  If not, perhaps you need to spend more time before you commit to a big attack.

You lost this game yesterday.   

I do remember that game, all going well until I mouse slipped on the rook, my idea was Rf1-f3. 

Most of the time the games I play end up with the opponent having 3/4 minutes more than me; that happens because my personal blunders which I try to remedy or, as I said, trying to reassemble the pieces and return to a more solid position. 

So I would say that many times it happens to me to use too much time.

It looks like you haven't played Puzzle Rush at all.   You should give it a try.

In that position I posted, you had a winning move.

'The Art of Attack in Chess' is a great book by Vladimir Vukovic. If you are able you might wish to check it out. I've always considered the middle game to be my weakest part of the game, but this book did clarify many attacking situations for me.

There is no infallible method for telling if your attack is premature. You make your best guess, and if your attack fails, you can analyze your game--or post it here--and figure out what went wrong, There's no substitute for experience, but if you don't analyze your failures, you aren't really gaining experience

That said, here are a couple of simple tips: 1) "Invite all your friends to the party!" Do you have pieces that aren't participating in your planned attack? Think about bringing them into the game before you commit to a sacrificial attack. This applies particularly to your rooks.  2)When hunting the enemy king, look for ways to cut off his escape routes, particularly with  "quiet" moves. Don't just chase him to safety with a series of empty checks. Keep him in a cage

When you don't have at least three pieces attacking your target.. 

When you can't successfully reinforce your first attacking idea.. then it's often premature and better to look for improving moves

#1
"How can I understand if the attack is premature "
++ Do you control 3 of the 4 central squares?
If yes, then your attack is likely to succeed: you can bring more attackers than he can bring defenders.
If no, then your attack is likely to fail.

32.Rxf7!

     The ability to calculate accurately to greater depth, particularly in forcing situations, is what separates you and me from elite players. Experience and practice will improve your ability and your instinct to "know" when an attack seems justified, but we all have a limit on what we can achieve. Many of Tal's sacrifices and astonishing bold plans proved to be flawed after later exhaustive analysis, but the best players in the world couldn't come up with the refutations over the board.

     If you like the thrill of the all-out speculative attack, go for it. It's certainly exciting, but as you have noticed it doesn't always succeed.

Sometimes, it's best to castle and develop fully before attacking.

I believe it was Steinitz who said that you should attack when you have a positional advantage.