experience versus book

I think major factor in improving game lies in playing more and more. A book can only provide guidelines of opening mid game or end game. But on grounds when you come to play you dont come across the situation which a book might have indicated because there are so many variations in this game. For instance when two players of equal ranking have read the same book which shows opening for both will you go by book. At times certain move comes in your mind which you never studied in book, this is natural talent. Usually books talk about openings or end games few mention about mid game. Books are reserved for those who want to do Phd in chess. So to improve game play nore and more.

I tend to agree with Emanuel Lasker. Chess is a struggle. It doesn't matter what the book says. You need to want it bad enough that you will fight to win.

Book.  There are people who played chess for decades I defeated after a superficial read of Encyclopedia of Chess Wisdom... an Eric Schiller book.  People think they're Nakamura with the 2.Qh5?! Sicilian but the pawn can be exchanged with 2...Nf6 3.Qxc5,Nxe4 and I win white's e-pawn for free very early.  Nearly every other joker on Yahoo! and many friends and relatives a decade ago played this as white.

Just playing < Just studying < studying and playing < studying and playing, with a concerted effort to apply what you studied < studying and playing, with a concerted effort to apply what you studied, and a concerted effort to find what you did wrong afterward.

The answer to this is because the path to improvement is so proven in most areas of human endeavor, that those who understand the path are in far better shape if they want to maximize their results than are those who are missing this info.

Capablanca recommends endgame study so a first endgame book with some ECE volumes should be great for improvement. The basic endgame book would help you interpret the Informant hieroglyphics (Oh zugzwang so a circle!  I see the idea!  Oh here he's widening the beach head, looks like I should apply breakthrough in this setup, etc.)

You should read the ECE with a more experienced player, preferably a coach so you try figuring out the solution yourself and identify the appropriate theme for continuation.  Remember, knowledge influence plans, which in turn drive analysis.  From the example words I give I of course strongly imply the pawn endgame Encyclopedia of Chess Endgames, which is where one should start for pawn endings (well, start with Muller's Secrets of Pawn Endings then the ECE volume 1 is your second pawn endgame book)

I've known a few players who never looked at a chess book and yet were tough opposition, probably 1400-1600 range. Two definitely had a flair for the game and the other had loads of experience.

I find its easy to get lazy on the chess board.  Sometimes I forget how difficult it is to milk tactics out of a difficult position.  Just sorta mindlessly developing your peices however well defended is not the same as fighting for any and every tiny advantage.

Sometimes I'll get lazy too.  I'll analyze so many non forcing lines whenever I'm not feeling lazy, and this overly carefulness eats up valuable time.  Sometimes one can get away with being lazy off general principles alone however.  Consider the following:

You seem to have a wrong impression what endgame study actually means. The word study clearly indicates that it has nothing to do with theoretical positions which is the only thing that ECE provides.

"Endgame"(or more correctly "Chess") is much more deep than just Encyclopaedias. Most of the theoretical positions don't happen or even if it does, the winner is already decided.

Simply ask yourself a question, how often have you encountered a QvsQ+P or RvsR+P or any other such ECE positions in your lifetime? I wouldn't be surprised if your answer is "1 or 2 times".(I have had QvsQ+P once.)

Now, of much more importance in the endgame is planning, identification of weaknesses etc. which are the base of deep positional understanding.

Just see the 5th and 6th games of the recent Anand-Carlsen match. I bet, noone would have won it even if ECE was beside them for reference. Now, just see the following:

You just saw how many mistakes Capablanca(The Great Endgame Player)
made in a simple theoretical position. Moreover, Capablanca was a genius of endgame and won most of his endgame positions. Even he wasn't well versed with this theoretical position. This simply proves that it wasn't theoretical knowledge which won him his endgames.

Now, you can judge by yourself how much important theoretical positions(which ECE and many other books provide) are.(are they?)

Like Reuben Fine said at the end of his Basic Chess Endgames memorization of the positions isn't important but understanding the principles and plans behind them.  If you know what to do in certain positions then the concrete moves will follow. 

"Now, of much more importance in the endgame is planning, identification of weaknesses etc. which are the base of deep positional understanding."

Yes I highly recommend Shereshevsky's Endgame Strategy it illustrates plans such as do not hurry, two weaknesses, bishop vs. knight, kingside vs. queenside majority, etc. 

But with theoretical endgames you don't just learn theoretical endgames you understand piece coordination better. The more positions we study the deeper our understanding so we don't for example go for triangulation when forcing the other side to catch the passed pawn while you raid the kingside is appropriate for the position.

Yes. positional understanding influences planning which in turn drives analysis. If a Carlsbad structure is there one could plan a minority attack or suppress black's ...c5 where piece placement determines plan priority.  

Ne5 or Rb1-b4 or a3-b4?  Specifics determine the best course of action. 

Book first before experience. Education is knowledge.