is attacking better than deffending?

Who Knows!

lol owned

Steinitz' Laws

1. At the beginning of the game the forces stand in equilibrium.
2. Correct play on both sides maintains this equilibrium and leads to a drawn game.
3. Therefore a player can win only as a consequence of an error made by the opponent. (There is no such thing as a winning move.)
4. As long as the equilibrium is maintained, an attack, however skilful, cannot succeed against correct defence. Such a defence will eventually necessitate the withdrawal and regrouping of the attacking pieces and te attacker will then inevitably suffer disadvantage.
5. Therefore a player should not attack until he already has an advantage, caused by the opponent's error, that justifies the decision to attack.
6. At the beginning of the game a player should not at once seek to attack. Instead, a player should seek to disturb the equilibrium in his favour by inducing the opponent to make an error - a preliminary before attacking.
7. When a sufficient advantage has been obtained, a player must attack or the advantage will be dissipated.

sure it is... u have more chances of winning then

This just doesn't follow. Sure, if the opponent has played only perfect moves so far then an attack can't win, but that doesn't mean that it has to lead to disadvantage.

A balance of both. Sometimes you have to tend to your defense before you can attack.