Just to be clear, you have been attacking others for quoting other qualified reviewers and not providing their own opinion, and when someone provides their own opinion, you do not want that either? The biggest problem I have with de la Maza's book is that it could be reduced to about 5 pages. He spends dozens of pages sounding like a bad motivational speaker (e.g. "I did it so you can do it, too! Just follow the plan I am going to lay out and you will be a 2000-rated player in no time! You will just need these other resources, do a lot of tactics over and over, oh, and it helps if you are unemployed for 2 years and can spend 7 hours a day on chess!" - that cuts out about 5 chapters of his book). If you want a study guide for lower levels, The Soviet Chess Primer and Lasker's Manual of Chess are both much better, as they have actual content in them. But if you do not need a plan (as you already know that you need to work on tactics and endgames), there are other books (as already mentioned in previous posts) that are focused on content. de la Maza's book is full on promises, empty on content.
... So to put it in context, for an 1100 rated player who gets mauled tactically in the opening and middle game he should study the endgame, did you really say that, I mean really? ...
Did you see BobbyTalparov (or anyone) say to only study the endgame.
"strawman, no one is claiming that Booby said someone should study the endgame exclusively. ..." - robbie_1969
If study involves tactics and endgames, might that help someone with a tactical-mauling problem?
To the OP:
Ignore everything past Post #12. Everything before post #12, use as you see fit.