This game was against a strong player in live chess, in which my opponent and I get into some  very tricky positions, and, despite pressure from my opponent, I won in the end.  It was almost a shame to achieve checkmate and end the game.  Comments and analysis are welcome.

I haven't quite gotten through the entire game yet.  But 6. Qe2 really just shuts down our white-squared bishop in order to commence a kingside castle.  Also, developing a queen - though your move would get by - before minor pieces - to me - is a no no.  I would've preferred something like 6. Bd3.

A job well done on mating your opponent - though I've got a question.  What rating was your opponent?  He made some horrendously terrible moves in the game such as: 11... Na6?  Continously through the game he kept that knight on the edge, a tragic mistake for black.  I didn't even see the possibility of him sacraficing that knight to rip open white's queenside pawns.

An interesting game that was,

photray94

9. Nd5 wins very quickly. Also, you could have taken the c7 pawn with your bishop on move 14, since the queen gets attacked by your rook. Black's 21st move wasn't a ? move, his 22nd was. Taking the rook on move 29 with the knight seems like an easier win.

So, to summarize, you missed some easier wins, but you didn't make any major tactical blunders on defense like your opponent did. Which is the most important thing imo, so well played :).

Photray also has a good point. Develop your minor pieces first, and connect the rooks. The only reason your light-squared bishop could come into action was because your opponent blundered.

My opponent was of equivalent rating, but ran into a time crunch where he had 4 minutes left after move 20 or so. The blunders were not so much determined by rating, as much as time mismanagement, although putting the Knight on the edge of the board I must question, as that was before the time crunch.