What is the difference between 1400+ and 1700+ player?

Q1

What do you think is the most important skill that 1700+ players have compared to 1400+ players?

(Standard Rating)

Q2

How many puzzles have you solved to reach 1700+? (approximately)

 I'm only 1200, but I've won against a few high 1400s.

The diference I think is: tactics and focus. Focus not to give away pieces. Oh and opening knowledge I think.

Oh..... friend.....

I am gonna kick you like a Spartan King in movie "300" 

Actually, I am sometimes lost after a few normal principle moves, so I started to study openings.

Thank you for opinion

This is just my perception of it, but I do happen to consider there being a fundamental shift in thinking between OTB 1400 and OTB 1700.

And that's that they know (or at least try to know, so will set for themselves) a general idea to work towards in the position. Something that ties all the moves together. Maybe a 1400 will do this, but then they might change their mind next move, and again on the next move etc, so there is actually no unifying idea. A 1700 will keep the same idea for many moves.

As a simple example, in the advance french variation, the pawn structure tells white to seek play on the kingside. White may play in the center or queenside as tactics demand, or may play in those areas to slow down the opponent's play when possible, but generally the moves will be geared towards the kingside where it's logical for white to seek play.

Of course they're not GMs. They may choose the wrong ideas, or be totally confused. Like the 1400 they may suddenly change their focus (although not nearly as often) but that's what I see as the main difference, that around this rating is when the moves begin to tell a story.

As for how many tactics to reach 1700 it's like asking how much water to make a young tree grown big.

It's not how much, but rather over how much time. You give it a little water every day, and over time it gets big. Give it a lot of water all at once may not make much of a difference.

So find a routine that's fun and you're willing to do every day (or almost every day). That can include 30-60 minutes of solving puzzles for example. If you really want to focus on tactics, then as long as 3 or 4 hours a day. Always review the puzzles you miss or struggled with. Review them again a few days later too. And this habit over time is what gives you results.

Oh, and the unifying idea thing. That's not something you just decide to do one day. It happens after you've played and studied enough.

Also of course the 1700 will be better at tactics, openings, endgames, just all around better.

In my opinion, tactical blunders are so prevalent at the 1400s elo level, that you can win a game simply by playing safe moves (that aren't totally ridiculous, like Nb8-c6-b8 stuff). 

At the 1700 level, simple play often may not cause them to blunder, and you'll need some pressure. But once you do apply pressure to them, the 1700s will blunder as often as the 1400s do.

yeah, Chin is right here, basically to get to 1600-1700 from 1400 all I did was try to develop a general "strategy" for the game, usually for me it comes at beginning of the mid-game, things like noticing that pawn structure allows attack on one side of the board or another, or noticing where pawn breaks are, or noticing when I can advance supported pawns to the 6th or 7th rank where the opponent may have to give back a piece....another thing when I was 1400ish I would look for big tactical moves, I still look for those but they are not there or I don't see them in most games, so now on advice of a few master and expert players I used to play with....I look of "little" moves, small advantages and just take what is given up....often just a tempo or a pawn can be enough to win.

A better tactical eye.

Beats me.