Someone please help me with endgames. I suck

Regarding my own experiences with endgames - 
the biggest problem for me about endgames - has been getting to the endgame.
In other words when playing against strong players - to get to the endgame one has to survive the opening and middlegame.

There's a theory of chess coaching that the endgame should be taught first.
So that players know what they're doing in the opening and middlegame.
I don't believe that endgames and middlegames and tactics are the big stumbling blocks in chess improvement.
Its openings. An enormous amount of time and energy and commitment invested in them ... only to find your opponent playing a different opening.

I meant Silman here. Feynman's a physicist not a chess player

I can help there is one fantastic book free to download, simply Google "Chees Fundamentals Capablanca Pdf" is the greatest book out there read this and everything you will need to help with your endgame and middle game is there taught in an East to grasp as possible way by one of the reatest chess players ever my uncle was a strong county standard player, I recall asking him to teach me chess, he gave me this book by Cabablanca and a chess set, he said read that thoroughly everything is there, once you have read this we can start!! Great starting point, great book.

But - you know what a zugzwang is though.
Knowing that it exists - vital in endgames.
Another thing that sets endgames apart is that its often one player going all out to draw and the other player trying to prevent that.
Why? Because in so many endgames one player has a big advantage.
Whereas in the opening and middlegame both players are more likely to have winning chances.
In other words 'draw theory' is big in endgames.
In openings and middlegames - not nearly as much.
You'll rarely see 'book draws' in those first two phases.
Again though - important to know that book draws exist and what they are.
So there it is again - familiarizing yourself with the issues of endings as opposed to endless memorizing and the so-called 'pattern recognition'.
A military man might call this familiarizing 'preparing the battlefield'.
You don't want to go into Battle and find yourself thinking
'Hey what's this ??'

Prepare the battlefield.
In Your Favor.

Probably your mind is rebelling against memorization because subconsciously it knows that that is not what's best.
When you Use information and use it efficiently - then memorization comes right along with it - if its useful.
A similiar thing happens with learning languages.
But why don't we talk a bit more about Preparing the Battlefield?

You can't win unless your opponent makes a big enough mistake or mistakes that you can exploit for a win.
You can't draw when you should lose - again unless he makes a big enough mistake or mistakes.
He can't beat you unless you make a big enough mistake or mistakes.
He can't draw you unless you make a big enough mistake or mistakes.
This is all known about chess.
One of the greats said it 'if nobody makes a mistake the game ends in a draw'
but that should be amended to 'big enough mistake'.
Point: to do well - you've got to reduce your mistakes.
You can't get rid of them completely but you've got to reduce them.
Many people will add 'No! You've got to play with great force and get your opponent to make mistakes!'
That's also valid.
You're not going to be winning without reducing your own mistakes.
So next - how not to do Mistakes?
To do that - you've got to know the Classic Mistakes - including your own.

this is also true. the art of doing nothing when there's nothing to do.

Study Karpov. improve your position. Magonovaf said to improve your worst placed piece.

Classic Mistake #1 is to prioritize
'What can my pieces do? I'm responsible for my pieces and he's responsible for his.'
Big big mistake !!
You're responsible for all the pieces and squares on the board.
But how to do that quickly and efficiently?
How to improve on that?
Somehow you've got to change how your mind approaches the position.
Various ways to do that.

Like: I see my opponent's last move. Its my move. What did his move do? 
What does it mean? 
What did it do at its arrival square? 
What did it do at its exit square?
Why did he make that move? 
It often costs a game when you don't at least try to figure out why your opponent made that move. Even though you can't always figure it - or not accurately or completely.

The two Kings. They're always there. They're the most vulnerable pieces.
What are their situations?
The queens. His. And yours. What's going on?
Then rooks bishops knights pawns. Both sides.
To be tactically efficient you've got to see the Killer Moves.
His. And Your's. The bigger the pieces involved - the more likely there's a Killer Move or Moves associated with those pieces. Against them or with them.

Always assume there's tactics there.
Find out what they are.
Don't say 'there's no tactics here yet' unless and until you're sure there's not.

Prepare the battlefield.

I would recommend Dvortesky's Endgame Manual 5th edition. It's dense and pretty dry, but it's trained several masters in all their endgame knowledge. It got me from 1600 to 1900 for sure, I recall winning many games in positions I had learned about in the book that I didn't previously know were winnable.