How to attack?

When I have enough time on my clock, I play decent, logical moves by calculating every possible line.
However, these moves are only good in the short term.
I have no lsrger strategy, so in many games against strong opponents, I have no attempt of winning, only of holding my position (which does not always succeed)

I need to learn strategy and endgame knowledge.

to illustrate, let us see this game. I was black

I had no attack at all and restrained myself to defending solely.

MCO15 seems to indicate that 9...O-O would have been better than 9...b6. Also, apparently, the machine thinks that 14...Rhf8 would have been better than 14...g4, 20...b5 would have been better than 20...Rf5, 21...Qxa4 would have been better than 21...Qg5, 23...Kc7 would have been better than 23...Qg6. 24...c5 would have been better than 24...Rf6, 27...h6 would have been better than 27...Rf7, 30...c5 would have been better than 30...Rf7, 33...Kd6 would have been better than 33...Kc6, 34...Rf1 would have been better than 34...Ra7, 36...Rg7 would have been better than 36...b5, and 41...Kc6 would have been better than 41...Kc5.

Your attack failed because a lot of pieces were traded off. Also they did not move any pawns in front of their King (no weaknesses or targets). You cannot attack just because you feel like it. The position has to demand it, and Kings being on opposite sides of the board cannot be the only reason you attack. Tunnel vision into one course of action is a problem that affects a lot of players including myself, but it is detrimental.

For example, on move 21, you had the very basic tactic 21...Qxa4 22.Nxa4 b5 and after Rxc5, you win back your pawn and can start advancing like b4, c5 freeing up your bishop which is very strong in this endgame. This is an easy thing to spot, unless you are forcing yourself to avoid the queen trade to attack, which led to pawn down endgame.

Sorry, the game somehow started on the wrong move.
It was always white to attack and me to respond. I had absolutely no idea what to do after winning back the pawn.

Whenever I have a better position, I just stand there without doing anything. I have no plan at all on what to to. Maybe I find some tactics and hope for the best, but nothing more.

I want to know: How can I win a game against someone who does not do major tactical mistakes.

I was black :

(The background of this is because I played 7 OTB matches beginning summer (won 0 drew 2 lost 5). My strategy until now was: 1. win material 2. defend. That needs to quickly change.)

@teachmewell said in #4:

... I was black : 1 Nf3 Nf6 2 g3 c5 3 Bg2 Nc6 4 O-O d5 5 d4 cxd4 6 Nxd4 Bg4 ...
Apparently, the machine thinks that 6...e5 would have been better than 6...Bg4, 10...O-O would have been better than 10...Qd7, 14...O-O would have been better than 14...Bxc3, 15...O-O would have been better than 15...Be6, 16...O-O would have been better than 16...Rd8, 17...Bg4 would have been better than 17...f5, and 20...Rhe8 would have been better than 20...Be6. As far as I can tell, the machine does not think that you ever had the better position.

Apparently, referring to 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e5 3 dxe5 Ng4 4 Nf3 Nc6 5 Bg5 Be7 6 Bxe7 Qxe7 7 Nc3 Ngxe5 8 Nxe5 Qxe5 9 e3,
@teachmewell said in #4:

... I had absolutely no idea what to do after winning back the pawn. ...
Again, MCO15 seems to indicate that 9...O-O would have been better than 9...b6. Perhaps, you are too reluctant to play ...O-O.

You need to provoke your opponent to make mistakes. You need to create and keep tension and imbalance in the position, even if it's not comfortable. This also involves better calculation/tactics and improving your thought process.

For example, you had the bishop pair, and unopposed dark bishop, but you immediately traded it for the knight, which just gives you a weaker position since white is attacking your pawns and you have no favorable imbalance. A move like this, trading off a really important positional advantage and piece, you should be very hesitant to make. Even isolating the c pawn doesn't do anything since it's not on an open file.
Instead castling, even if white wins the pawn, you have a lot of compensation and activity in the endgame with the bishop pair - this is actually a common idea in some openings and black is fine and actually it's pretty easy to hold a draw, and white can easily make a mistake under the threat of the bishops.

@crtex said in #6:

You need to provoke your opponent to make mistakes.
That is my main question: How to provoke my opponent / How do I attack and create threats?
The trouble is: I play against opponents who studied their opening repertoire, are better at strategy and not much worse at tactics. With about two hours (add increment) on their clock, they calculate everything concrete they can and will not find less than I do.

You need to create and keep tension and imbalance in the position, even if it's not comfortable. This also involves better calculation/tactics and improving your thought process.

I am perfectly comfortable with tension, since I have a clear motive. My strengths lie in calculation in detail. (I calculate every main and sideline even when it costs 10s of minutes to do so).
I am terrible with strategy. When I have an endgame in front of me, I do not know what to do.
I lack all understanding of 'positional play'. And I rarely find quiet moves.

Do you know an opening that creates tension?

For example, you had the bishop pair, and unopposed dark bishop, but you immediately traded it for the knight, which just gives you a weaker position since white is attacking your pawns and you have no favorable imbalance. A move like this, trading off a really important positional advantage and piece, you should be very hesitant to make. Even isolating the c pawn doesn't do anything since it's not on an open file.

It was a 100Minute +30 Sec / move game. I had a lot of hesistation. I think there is no alternative to trading. I could play Be6 instead of trading, then white takes on d5.
My wrongful play must have happened before that. In somehow creating those advanced yet aimless central pawns. That is my meaning behind 'I have no strategy'.

Instead castling, even if white wins the pawn, you have a lot of compensation and activity in the endgame with the bishop pair - this is actually a common idea in some openings and black is fine and actually it's pretty easy to hold a draw, and white can easily make a mistake under the threat of the bishops.
Ok, I should have read before answering in detail.
Will white not just play Rd1?

So what does the game show? That I lack endgame knowledge (I always fight for every pawn no matter what)? How can I improve my play?

It was a 100Minute +30 Sec / move game. I had a lot of hesistation. I think there is no alternative to trading. I could play Be6 >instead of trading, then white takes on d5.
My wrongful play must have happened before that. In somehow creating those advanced yet aimless central pawns. That is >my meaning behind 'I have no strategy'.

Ok, I should have read before answering in detail.
Will white not just play Rd1?

It doesn't matter if white takes of plays Rd1 - the whole point is that you're not afraid of them capturing the pawn. If white plays Rd1 then you can just play Rb8 attacking their pawn. They develop, you also develop and attack their pawn. The point is that you didn't have to give up your very strong bishop pair just to try and defend a weak pawn.

That is my main question: How to provoke my opponent / How do I attack and create threats?
With about two hours (add increment) on their clock, they calculate everything concrete they can and will not find less than I >do.

This is a pretty complicated and vast topic, but a large part of it is being comfortable with imbalances. In game 2, you should have kept the bishop pair, kept developing without being afraid of white winning a pawn. In game 1, your opponent on move 21 did not calculate properly, and made a mistake that gave away a pawn - you missed 21...Qxa4 and then b5 which led to a worse endgame.

I am perfectly comfortable with tension, since I have a clear motive. My strengths lie in calculation in detail. (I calculate every >main and sideline even when it costs 10s of minutes to do so).

In that case, it may be an evaluation problem. For example, you need to reflect on how you not play 21...Qxa4 in the first game? That is a very easy calculation to see, but maybe you didn't think the endgame was good for some reason?

I am terrible with strategy. When I have an endgame in front of me, I do not know what to do.
I lack all understanding of 'positional play'. And I rarely find quiet moves.

I don't think this is true. You're not that bad in these areas. And everyone is trying to improve here, it just takes practice and analyzing your own games. There are no shortcuts really.

Do you know an opening that creates tension?

You can play almost anything. From these games, it is not the opening that's the issue. You played black twice, and had multiple chances to fully equalize and get a great position, but it was missed. I beat plenty of 2000 FIDE and above OTB by playing Scotch Gambit, Grand Prix, Sicilian Dragon, not the best openings.

Referring to the position after 1 Nf3 Nf6 2 g3 c5 3 Bg2 Nc6 4 O-O d5 5 d4 cxd4 6 Nxd4 Bg4 7 Nxc6 bxc6 8 c4 e6 9 Nc3 Bd6 10 Qa4 Qd7 11 Bg5 Be5 12 Bxf6 Bxf6 13 cxd5 exd5 14 e4,
@crtex said in #6:

... you immediately traded [your unopposed dark bishop] for the knight, which just gives you a weaker position since white is attacking your pawns and you have no favorable imbalance. A move like this, trading off a really important positional advantage and piece, you should be very hesitant to make. Even isolating the c pawn doesn't do anything since it's not on an open file.
Instead castling, even if white wins the pawn, you have a lot of compensation and activity in the endgame with the bishop pair - this is actually a common idea in some openings and black is fine and actually it's pretty easy to hold a draw, and white can easily make a mistake under the threat of the bishops.
@teachmewell said in #7:
... Will white not just play Rd1? ...
@crtex said in #8:
... It doesn't matter if white takes [or] plays Rd1 - the whole point is that you're not afraid of them capturing the pawn. If white plays Rd1 then you can just play Rb8 attacking their pawn. They develop, you also develop and attack their pawn. The point is that you didn't have to give up your very strong bishop pair just to try and defend a weak pawn.
I am not sure whether 14 e4 O-O 15 Rad1 or 14 e4 O-O 15 Rfd1 is being discussed, but, in either case, I would think that the appropriate reaction would have been 15...Bxd1. After 14 e4 O-O, I would think that sensible play might have been 15 exd5 cxd5 16 Qxd7 Bxd7 17 Rac1 Rad8 18 Nxd5 Bxb2 19 Rc7 a6 and it seems that Black would have been doing somewhat better than what might have happened after 14 e4 Bxc3 15 bxc3 Be6 16 f4. As it happened, White did not think to play 16 f4, but, if one takes risks like that, sooner or later, one’s luck is going to run out: 16 Rad1 Rd8 17 f4 f5 18 exf5 Bxf5 19 Rfe1+ Kf7 20 c4 Be6 21 f5 Bxf5 22 cxd5 cxd5 23 Bxd5+ Kg6 24 Qa6+ Kg5 25 h4+ Kg4 26 Bf3+ Kxf3 27 Rxd7 ...
@teachmewell said in #7:
... My wrongful play must have happened before [14...Bxc3]. In somehow creating those advanced yet aimless central pawns. That is my meaning behind 'I have no strategy'. ...
I am only a former USCF ~1500 player, but, if I had to guess, I would choose your decision to play 6...Bg4 (instead of 6...e5) as the start of your difficulties. It seemed that, sooner or later, you were going to face Nxc6 and the prospect of a d5-pawn, a c6-pawn, and an a8-rook, all in line with the g2-bishop. To my superficial brain, it seems that it could have been expected that the c8-bishop was going to be required for defense closer to home. Had it been me as White, you might have realistically expected me to crumble under the pressure and not play efficiently, but, as an over-2000 player, you can expect your opponents to be made of sterner stuff.