Sometimes a sentence reaches across two times. For a past cause with a result now, use if + had + the past participle, then would + the base verb. A word like now points to the result.
A past cause with a result you feel now
If I had studied harder, I would be more confident now.
If they had saved then, they would have enough today.
If we had moved earlier, we would be settled by now.
Try it: Years ago, Lars chose not to learn to drive. Because of that one past decision, he depends on buses every single day at present. Which one fits a past choice that shapes his life now? (If he had learned to drive, he would be more independent now. / If he had learned to drive, he would have been more independent.) Answer: If he had learned to drive, he would be more independent now. — The past choice still shapes how things are for him, so the result reaches to the present: would be more independent. "Would have been" would close the result off in the past, but the effect on him is ongoing right up to now.
How you are now, with a past result
Run it the other way for a lasting trait now that would have changed a past event: use if + the past form, then would have + the past participle. The result sits in the past. One form to watch: in these unreal if-clauses be takes were for every person (If I were, If he were, If she were, If they were). You will also hear If I was in everyday speech, but were is the standard written form and the safer choice in an exam. That is why the examples below all say were, even after I, he, and she.
If she were braver, she would have applied last year.
If I were more organized, I would have finished on time.
If they were better planners, they wouldn't have missed it.
Try it: Mei is a shy person, and she has always been that way. That lasting shyness is the reason she didn't go for the promotion last spring. Which one fits a trait she still has that changed a past event? (If she were more confident, she would have gone for it last spring. / If she had been more confident, she would have gone for it last spring.) Answer: If she were more confident, she would have gone for it last spring. — Both options are correct English; here the meaning decides. Her shyness is a lasting trait she still has, so the if-half uses the present-style past form: If she were more confident. "If she had been more confident" is also grammatical (a full third conditional), but it frames her confidence as a one-off past state, losing the "this is who she always is" point you're told about her.
Try it: Priya is cautious by nature, and that lasting caution is why she turned down the job offer last month. You want the standard form of be in the unreal if-clause about the way she is. Which one uses the standard form of be here? (If she were bolder, she would have taken the offer. / If she was bolder, she would have taken the offer.) Answer: If she were bolder, she would have taken the offer. — In these unreal if-clauses, be takes were for every person, so the standard form is "If she were bolder" — not "If she was." You will hear "If she was" in casual speech, but the standard written form is were. The tense pairing is right in both: a present-style were for the trait she still has, then would have taken for the past result. A second common slip is mismatching the halves — writing "If she were bolder, she would take it" when the result is a finished past event that needs would have taken.
Which way does the sentence run?
To pick the pattern, find the cause and the result, then check which time each one sits in. Past cause → result now:if + had + past participle, then would + the base verb (If I had saved, I would have more now). Trait now → past result:if + the past form (and remember be → were for every person), then would have + the past participle (If I were richer, I would have bought it). Let the time words decide: now / today pulls the result to the present; last year / back then anchors it in the past.
Past cause, result now: If he had trained, he would be ready now.
Trait now, past result: If he were fitter, he would have won last week.
Watch the time word: now points to a present result; last week points to a past one.
Try it: A past action with a result felt today: they didn't buy the house back then, so they are still renting now. A lasting trait now with a past result: she is naturally cautious, which is why she turned the risky offer down last year. Match each one. Which way does each run? Answer: A past action with a result felt today: they didn't buy the house back then, so they are still renting now. → 1 → If they had bought it, they would own a home now. · 2 → If she were bolder, she would have accepted it last year. A lasting trait now with a past result: she is naturally cautious, which is why she turned the risky offer down last year. → 1 → If they were richer, they would have bought it. · 2 → If she had been bolder, she would accept risky offers now. — A past action with a result now runs had + would: had bought, would own a home now. A lasting trait now with a past result runs past form + would have: were bolder, would have accepted last year. Both pairings use real grammar — the second one is just matched to the wrong cases. Read which time the cause sits in and which time the result lands in.