desperately seeking Nostradamus

How many moves ahead could you see?

Oh I try and see at least a couple. But the best laid plans.....

I can definately see several moves ahead - whether I see all moves ahead is a different story. (some of my losses were the result of complications I made that costed me serious material after failing to see just one little move)

He maked a mistake :)

Well, for example, here's the game I was referring to:

It was a draw. But when you took that bishop with your rook it was losing.

31. Qd5+ was White's best here. Trying to give the King more space with h4 loses to Be2+. However, if White still wants to try for it, he can park his Queen on a dark square with check and then move the h-pawn.

Looking ahead really only comes into play when you have a long, forcing line. The more unforced your opponent's moves are, the foggier the future becomes.

on move 26 u should go rook to c1

I think it was Reti who would answer this question by saying "Usually, just one."

What he was trying to get at is that calculation can only work when there are a limited number of forced responses.  If there are only one or two remotely reasonable things the other guy can do, then you can calculate, and depending on the situation you can sometimes calculate very deeply.  Other times there might be a large number of ways that the opponent could react to your move.  In those circumstance you are wasting time and energy trying to calculate deeply.  Give the situation a quick tactical check to make sure you are not doing something stupid, and pull the trigger. 

In terms of 5-10 minute games, when I'm playing my best, usually no more than 2, 3 moves at the most, unless there's a forcing tactic.  When I'm playing poorly usually around 4-7 moves ahead.  Doing more calculation means I'm not following the game and I'm trying to force good play.

Solving tactics easily 10 moves ahead, although they're far from best of course ;)  I can also play blindfold so that's like what, 40 moves ahead :)

The point with chess though has always been accuracy.  No one wins because they've seen more, they win because of the accuracy of their evaluations and the relevance of the moves they calculate and choose.  For example in the above diagrams there are terrible blunders that should be avoided if you can only see 1-2 move ahead, but players ignore these moves unless they practice always looking for good ones.  Interestingly you have to always look for why a move may be bad... instead in those diagrams you see people trying to show why their moves are good (with mates and such) and so one side plays good moves while the other blunders.

Write the moves down or call them out and (with enough time) top GMs could see 100,000 moves ahead, but that's not what separates them from weaker GMs and IMs who could easily do the same.

If you know all the moves of your opponent in advance what's the point of playing

Long enough to reach the ground, my son.