Explain My Mistakes

Hello! I really could use some help from some high level chess players. I want to learn how to learn from my mistakes so that I do not make them again. 

I play standard 30 min chess games and after each one is finished I always do a computer analysis on them. The problem is, I don't always know why the computer says that certain moves are bad. 

Just so we're on the same page here, the computer analysis that chess.com offers is said to be a 2500 level rating and gives three different types of bad moves: inaccuracies, mistakes, and blunders. Inaccuracies are the smallest errors and blunders are the biggest. I can almost always go back and understand why a blunder was made. I can understand the the mistakes maybe 50% of the time, sometimes more if I really spend a lot of time looking at it. The inaccuracies I can virtually never tell why they are bad. I need the help of some strong players (please be very good, I want accurate advice) to explain WHY the computer says that my moves are bad. I can't learn much if I don't know what my error was and how to correct it. 

I will post my first example in a bit. For now I will leave it at that because for some screwed up reason chess.com will delete my posts if I take more than a half hour to compose them. (Seriously you guys NEED to fix that nonsense!). 

If anyone has any good chess strategies tips or tricks post them and I will put them all together into an article or blog

i would not trust the computer analysis of the chess.com computers they are horrible.  Best way to learn from your mistakes, break out a real board and pieces and go through your games slowly and compare your moves to the moves strong players played in similiar positions.

Definitly

Ok, here's my first computer analyzed game: 

?! = Inaccuracy

? = Mistake

?? = Blunder

Re1 yea wasn't a very good move, maybe e5 or d3 is better, but after is plays e5 and you play f4 your rook would stand better on the f file.  14.  c3 hangs a pawn and opens up his dark squared bishop.  The first rule to getting better is to stop hanging pawns and pieces.  Once you do that you will probably hit 1700.  I would just focus on tactics for now.

The 2000 Computer Analysis claims that Sicilian Defense is a mistake!!!!!!!!!

+1

2200, can you explain why 9.fxe5 was a mistake?

I think since you are slightly behind in developmet and have less space opening the position with fxe5 does not seem to be in your favor.  I maybe would have played f5 in that position.  Make the dark squared bishop stare it's pawns.

Or nd2 than to f3 trying to catch up in development.  Black can't play exf4 because e5 would win a peice for you anyways.  One thing strong players I find are good at (2200+)  is leaving tension in the position it creates more opportunities for your opponent to go wrong as well.  If fxe5 isn't forced why play it unless your getting a clear strategic advantage, and who knows maybe he would blunder with exf4

Here is another game I played, this time I made a lot of mistakes...can someone explain why they are wrong and can you teach me what lesson I should take away from it for the future?

The reason I played 6.bxc3 is because I was told that if you have to make doubled up pawns that it's better to have them capture towards the center. Why is dxc3 the better move? 

For move 16 the computer said d4 was a mistake (though it didn't call it that for some reason, it called it an alternative suggestion)...what's wrong with d4 and why should I play Kd2?

Also for move 18 why Bf1? 

Also, why 9. c4, why 13. Bh3, why 19. f4, etc. 

I'd like all my mistakes/inaccuracies explained by a master player who can teach me something from them. Thanks.