Did I do something wrong in this game?

I was playing white. I am 1403 and my opponent was 1700. I lost.

The series of exchanges that you played in the opening were not productive... at the beginning of the game, White starts with an extra move, but by move ten in your game (after the exchange of Queens) the two sides were identical except that Black (not White) had two extra moves made... O-O and Rd8.

Instead of that long series of trades starting with 5. dxe5 you would have been better off to maintain the tension and just develop some more pieces.

I agree with bleemu -- too many exchanges.  I've often heard that you shouldn't exchange unless it does something concrete for your position.  Otherwise you're probably losing time (letting him bring pieces into play by recapturing).

But your biggest mistake was falling for the pawn fork.  Up until then you were doing pretty well.

Thank you for your comments. I agree. I will try to think about time management more often.

When I say exchanges often "lose time", I'm not really referring to time management (management of the clock).  Often you'll notice that you are exchanging a developed piece, and letting your opponent recapture with a developing move.  This represents a loss of tempo, which is kind of like giving your opponent extra moves for free.

I knew what you meant when you said it. During my game, I had pleanty of time on the clock. Its hard to type what I meant. Thanks for the clarification.

Many chess positions... not all, of course... can be broken down into an interlocking set of basic elements:

1) Time (often equivalent to development, but not quite the same thing).

2) Space (control of the board, especially the central terrain).

3) Force (advantage in material - and remember that all Pawns are not worth the same... an e-Pawn is much more valuable than an h-Pawn).

4) Initiative (the ability to dictate the flow of the game and to limit the opponent's choice of responses).

5) Pawn structure (self explanatory, but includes the interaction between Pawns and pieces, such as bad Bishops confined by their own Pawns).

An advantage in Time is the easiest to convert (ie: the easiest to turn into a mating attack), but it tends to evaporate if you can't use it effectively within the next several moves.

An advantage in Space is trickier to exploit... the most thematic way to convert it is to use alternating threats on different sectors of the board. The opponent, being cramped, will usually get his pieces into a tangle trying to parry the different threats, at which point you can convert your advantage in Space first into a Time advantage and then into a direct attack.

Advantages in Force or Pawn structure give you the option to exchange down into a favorable endgame.

Your problem in the opening phase of this game is that you acted as if you already had an advantage in Force or Pawn structure (exchanging down towards an endgame)... when in fact you had no such advantage.

Exchanges are not a way of gaining an advantage... they are a way of exploiting an advantage (in Force or Pawns structure) that you already possess.

Wow. You went above and beyond. Thank you so much! I will keep this handy list in my mind. Most importantly, i will not exchange when i'm down on material. Once again, thanks.

when they play  d6 play d4

I will also not exchange when I am equal in material if I don't have any advantage, wheter it be space, time, or structure.

As far as exchanging goes... a guide-line might be:

Advantage in Force or Pawn Structure: exchanging will usually increase your advantage.

Advantage in Time or Space: exchanging will usually reduce your advantage, or even lose it completely.

Equal position: exchanging will often lose time and equalize space.

Good job working on your game ChezBoy... Idea above about Maintaining the Tension is a good one.  I hope we can play again soon.  Milton.

I hope we can play again as well. Thank you.

In general, yes, you are correct that a rook pawn is worth less than a central pawn. But there are certainly non-trivial exceptions to this guideline (which I suspect you're aware of, but just didn't bother to get into for the sake of brevity). I'm mentioning this for the sake of the OP, who happens to be a buddy of mine.

Central pawns tend to be worth more than flank pawns in the opening/middlegame phases. But as the endgame approaches, flank pawns tend to gain in relative value, while the central pawns tend to lose relative value. One reason for this is that an outside (i.e. flank) passed pawns can deflect pieces away from the action taking place elsewhere on the board, and since piece activity is of the utmost importance in endgames, a piece having to do guard duty on the outside flank can (in some cases) be fatal in itself. This is especially true of knight endings, since knights are incapable of moving efficiently from one side of the board to the other.
Another reason is that central control tends not to be as important in an endgame as it is in the middlegame (although it can still be important). Central control is typically just a means to an end...a means to attacking the enemy king. In the endgame, the means to that same end is promoting a pawn, and central control isn't always necessary to achieve this aim.