<1600 it's all about Tactics- >1600 it's Strategy.

I'm right on the cusp. Not enough Tactics - Not enough Strategy.

I wouldn't say that sub-1600 is all about tactics.  Learning strategy is key for a player of any level.  The problem with purely tactical players is that they miss a lot of correct strategical goals in their games.  A strategist will read the board and figure out what he has to do...any tactics that accompany the realization of that goal will be spotted with practice.

I have seen people who know the correct strategic goals of the position but fail at achieving them because they fail so miserably at tactics. take for example Me! I was playing an alekhine defence and around move 17 one could venture to say I had equalized. any way I was preparing for an e7-e5 break and miserably failed to time it corectly. I played the break way to soon.

"Tactics" is a totally different matter at the highest levels, as tactics consist of gaining static advantages (not necessarily material!) very often.

I think we need to establish a clear definition of tactics.

sample

a tactic is a series of reasonably forcing moves designed by the agressor to gain some sort of clear advantage in the form of Material, Tempo, Mate, Space, Center Control, a viable defence, or any combination of the previous.

Strategy is the use of tactics to achieve a desired goal, like Mate, Massive material advantage, or an impenetrable defence.

Strategy in chess (i think) is to form a plan and carry it out. Like improving the position of pieces, forcing weaknesses in the opponents pawn structure etc etc.

tactics basically is forcing moves to win material or mate etc etc like what others have said.

I don't know what that cusp is, but I've often shared this feeling!  Not enough anything

the more I read about strategy the more I realize I don't understand the moves better players make.I would much rather go afterba pawn or a piece.