I’m confused? Are tactics or endgames more important?

Thanks for the respones everyone

At your level (which is a bit higher than mine) you're better than 99+% of online chess players and have a fundamental grasp of the basics of the game. At this point improving chess depends on your particular weaknesses.

Beginners need to study tactics because all beginners hang pieces like crazy, don't count attackers and defenders etc. etc.  Beginners need to learn basic endgame checkmate patterns because all the advantage in the world means nothing if you can't find the mate. Beginners need to learn opening principles, because otherwise they don't have pieces out to execute tactics. 

An 1890 will have mastered all of these basics to get to that level. An 1890 will have certain tactical proficiency, but still might be weak on them if they're missing more advanced tactics regularly. Or an 1890 might be a tactical wizard, but makes poor long term strategic decisions and lose games that way. Or an 1890 might be good strategically and good at tactics but not know how to convert certain winning endgames. 

If you're unsure what your weaknesses are after analyzing your games get some stronger players to point them out to you. 

For a beginning player, there is nothing more important than basic tactics. Until you stop losing your pieces to one-move threats, or getting mated when you didn't see it coming, you can't really play chess. And if you don't see your opponent's hanging pieces, they can get away with anything.  

Naka plays absurd openings online to troll and wins against opponents who are at the very top of the server.  Tactics and endgame, the opening might have some tricky stuff to learn in case your opponent blunders horribly and there is a neat tactic that wins... But I think if you watch his live stream you'll quickly realize that openings are not the thing to focus.

At your level, endgames.

At mine, tactics then endgames.

I never said I wanted people to study opening traps, I said tactics so you can stay out of them. also like I said it depends, like blitz or not there isn't a point to teaching endgames to someone who is just starting out because they will never see them in a game, therefor they won't understand them. do tactics, basic openings, try not to hang anything, and when you start making it to the endgame more often (in any format) then start looking at the basic endgame techniques, and as you progress grow you endgame knowledge. I know this as my experience as a player and as a coach

It depends on the level, at the 1500+ range anybody should have a dependable opening where they are not going to fall for any traps and get a solid position. But yes tactics and middle game strategy are the main focal points when improving. (also Naka is just insanely good I don't see that as a great comparison because we are so much worse then him we can't do something like that and get away with it

Practically no one uses their tournament openings in blitz, so it's not like Naka is the only one.

Also I got to my peak rating two different ways. One with tournament openings, and one with "garbage" openings. I don't think it matters as long as you're familiar with the middlegames you're getting.

Openings, middles, endings, tactics ... they all blend into the same thing: looking at the position, identifying the needs of the position, and considering candidate moves.

So I'd say it doesn't really matter which phase of the game you're studying. As long as you're practicing that same basic thought process.

We are talking about the "overall growth" of someones chess and how to use it. We aren't talking blitz, we are talking about your understanding. So again, I repeat myself, I don't recommend using gambit openings unless it is for a different training purpose (liked defending positions, tactical play, intuition, or the initiative) because using main lines will improve your chess overall. All the way to endgame

I didn't either. On the first page I recommended that when a player chooses to study openings that they take it seriously and develop a good repertoire.

I would say play a strong opening if u play a strong opening, it leads to a favorable middlegame and there r chances that u might win in the middlegame imao (I'm 1666 rapid )

Well, you are a living example of someone who manages to excel in chess even after studying openings first...

This is provided the player is able to play the later stages well.

Some of my lower rated players play solid openings, only for me to realise afterwards that they know nothing much beyond openings and then I pounced on the tactical opportunities.

I'm not that qualified to answer this in exact detail since my rapid rating is lower than yours.

I would presume that both are equally important as factors - good tactical ability allows players to obtain a winning advantage or bail themselves out of losing positions, while good endgame ability is crucial in obtaining the win since even the slightest of errors in the endgame can be fatal.

It's a sad reality that we train either tactics or endgame tecniques at the expense of the other.

Both are equally important!  Do not brush off one just to do the other.

Middlegames and Endgames are to chess like Oil and Tires are to mechanics.  Your car ain't getting anywhere unless both are there and in good condition.

Tactics are more important. 99% of chess is tactics. Engines without table bases are weak at openings and endgames, but they beat any human with middlegame tactics.
Around a rating of 2000, when offensive and defensive tactics of both players hold each other in balance, endgames become decisive. Carlsen wins most of his games in the endgame.
Above 2800 when both players are equally versed in tactics and endgames, the opening becomes important, for example in world championship matches and in ICCF correspondence.

#41
tactics > endgames > openings

endgames