Midgame questions.

How do you play the midgame?  I know that this is a very vague question, but here are more specific questions:

1. What specific things do you think about and focus on?

2. How do you tell if it is better to simplify?

3. I can find some tactics, but how do you set up tactics and avoid tactics your opponent is trying to set up?

Thank you in advance for your help.

1) Always have a plan. Whether targeting a weak square, trapping a piece, or checkmate, your moves should further your goal unless when necessarily countering your opponent's moves, in which case sometimes you can do both at once.

Also, attempt to constrict your opponent's moves so that he has little useful things to do.

2) If it gives you an advantage. Trading a useless bishop for an active knight - good job! Vice versa - what were you thinking?

3) That depends. Often the threat of a tactic (or mate) is more potent than the actual tactic. Threatening back rank mate or a knight fork can sometimes force your opponent to make major concessions.

I double as many pawns as possible. Triple them if possible.

Trade my strong pieces for my opponent's weak ones.

Totally ignore any double attacks the opponent is trying to set up.

Hey. My king is protected by magical spirits, so I don't bother worrying about king safety.

I decide moves by a roll of the dice.

(I can go on, if you like.)

Bhomas, I am being serious, so quit trolling, jackass.  Timothy, by 2 I mean when are you better off in a position with more pieces than in a position with fewer pieces.

Oh! My bad chasm, I should have realized that that was what you meant by "simplify".

I hope someone better than me can give input too, but I would say if it gives you some kind of advantage or makes it quicker/easier to win, go for it.

For example:

If I have 2R + B vs. B, I will happily trade bishops or even a rook for a bishop because such a trade will allow me to win faster.

It's called humor. Not trolling. Grow a brain.

Just block him if he persists; then he can't post in your topics.

chasm

Another thing to note is your respective pawn structures.

If you have "passed protected" pawns, then look to trade pieces, so your passed pawn has more of chance to dash for queening.

If the pawn structure is "locked" then trade a poor bishop for a knight if you can.

I actually offered you helpful ideas...even if reverse-psychological comments. So block me. I don't care. You are no one to me.  

"Pawns are the soul of chess"

I think Timothy_P and Lagomorph have good recommendations. I try to only trade material to simplify if I am up in material or I need to remove a defender/attacker for tactical purposes. I still have a tendency to trade first think later but I have found that gets me into trouble sometimes.

@Estragon  Could you recommend a good article/blog or maybe even book to learn more about central pawn structure and how best to read/react to it. Thanks.

1. It depends on the position. In an open game, I think about development (i.e. who's better developed), who has the better tactics available to them, and whether my king appears safe enough from danger. In closed games, I'm more likely to think about (for example) key outpost squares, pawn breaks I want to achieve, and whether my pieces are placed in their optimal squares.

2. Knowing when a piece exchange benefits either you or your opponent more is something that takes some playing experience and intuition to figure out, and sometimes it's not at all obvious that a certain exchange is correct for you (as Fischer proved in a famous game he won against Petrosian, where he traded his good knight for black's ostensibly weaker bishop...Fischer's intuition apparently was correct, nonetheless).

But some basic guidelines: piece exchanges will tend to favor the player with less space, if a particular piece you have isn't particularly active and seems to have few prospects of activity in the future (e.g. black's light square bishop in many French Defense lines), then it's typically to the benefit of that player to exchange that troublesome piece.
In an open position it's typically favorable to trade a knight for a bishop, but for more closed positions with potential outpost squares, it's more likely to be worth trading a bishop for a knight.

This does not take into account trades that are dictated by tactical concerns, which are often more important than long term positional considerations.

3. Very open-ended question that there's really no easy answer to, since you want to play according to principles of both strategic and tactical concerns...something that tends to come with playing experience and studying.

study the french defense, especially the advance variation but other variations as well. maybe pick up this one opening and study it as deeply as you can, maybe for months.

Sounds good. I will try it.

Other have made good points, but I think there is still an important one :

...but do not stick to the plan no matter what. If your opponent makes a mistake that could be punished by abandoning the plan, do it.

And on a similar note, try to always determine your opponent's idea behind each move. (sometimes there are none, but try still !)

Yeah i kinda gotten away from that a little after reading all thes books with rules. And it came more natural to me then.

Question #2

You shoould trade pieces when:

- you are ahead in material

- your opponent has the initiative

- you are cramped for space

- the piece you would trade is ineffective

On the flipside, you should NOT trade pieces when:

- you are behind in material

- you have the initiative

- your opponent is cramped for space

- the piece you would trade is effective

Him looking at your avatar!

Yeah your the right person to talk about trading.

"My pretty, my precious bishop"

OK with (...), but not with what is left.

You should trade when the pieces that remain after the trade are more effective than what was before the trade.

The difference is subtle, but for instance in the following position (extreme example) White's bishop is clearly inferior to Black's knight, but trading would be a mistake as all the black pieces would become active :

When i first started playing chess i trade just to get to the End Game where i knew i was strong. Even if i was behind a piece, back then i would still find ways to win as long the material advantage was not too large.