Game Analysis please

Tonydal- Wow I didn't see that at all. Makes me wish I was playing as white in this game and finished off like that, nice find, it would have been a really nice mate. 

Paulgottlieb- thanks very much for your input. I thought about 12...Nf5 but I also thought that I would not be able to really do much at that point, and thought this was a good chance for an attack. I was also a little bit worried that after Qh3 he I would need to push my h-pawn up. But I think that might have been better as my center was quite good at that point, as you said.

I never considered 14...Nd4, I was too worried about the double pawns. But you are very right. That wouldn't have been a problem at all considering, I really would have had an extremely strong center giving very little space to his other knight. And the bishop wouldn't have really been able to get out properly. 

I guess I was being too greedy by taking that pawn. Thanks for Rb8, I didn't really know how to continue from there, I tend to be too focused on one thing when I play sometimes.

Wow you really are right about Bg5, I don't know how I did not notice that at all in the game or even now :/, that would have been bad.

About Qe7, I was so worried that he would do Bd6 but seeing it now he would have lost Knight and bishop for rook. Or I could have been took his rook instead with my knight (after he took my rook with bishop). 

Thanks very very much for your feedback, it really helped. I can't believe I missed out on a lot. It's weird that people can see the game very differently on what others missed, etc, but also probably because you are a better player. Anyways thanks so much!

paulgottlieb: what was your plan in your suggested 12...Nf5? just a question, saw the game and i'm curious

Paulgottlieb- Do you know any computer programs that would be free for a Mac computer? (or should I perhaps ask somewhere else). I know what you mean though, sometimes looking back on games I see that both players missed out on really great combinations a lot of the times. 

Fivesword- You are quite right. A lot of times when I play, do moves I do is based on either the best attacking strategy on my opponent's pieces or doing a move that looks good. Sometimes the move can be good, but a lot of times I do not consider my opponent's next move (sometimes I just see 4 moves ahead on what I would do, but it becomes useless when my opponent can easily block it off), like at move 15 where I didn't for some reason expect the bishop. Or in the second game list (the first one I played), on move 13 I wanted to put a lot of pressure on the f-pawn (and was planning to attack with the knight next) but missed out on his Na4 move which I think messed things up quite a bit, for me. But also because of the time pressure for certain moves I don't want to spend too much time calculating but at the same time, especially towards the end of the first game at a critical point, I felt I had enough defense but I actually did not (if he played his best moves).

Chry3841- I think he was mainly saying that at the point of the game f6 was not necessary as it weakens my e-pawn and opens up my king to more attacks. To be honest when playing I thought he would just take my pawn (which would have been nice for me I think), and then I would have the whole center to myself and could free up my light-squared bishop. But yea, I did not consider him not taking lol. One of the reasons people do the f6 move is because they are being cramped up quite a lot especially on the king-side, but in the game I had most of the space and my bishop could develop to b7 targeting the King-side. Therefore all my pieces would be quite nice. I possible continuation would be 12... Nf5 13. Qh3 h6 14. Nf3 and I could either directly do 14... Nd4 (or a slower Bb7 or Bd7) targeting the c-pawn (this time not being attacked as much lol). And if he took my knight, 15. Nxd4 cxd4 16. I think that Na4 won't be so strong as after Qc6 his knight can't really go anywhere so it would be necessary to play b3 (he can't play Qb3 as after Bd7 I believe the knight is dropped) and then allowing me to take the c pawn (also then after his c-pawn is dropped my pawn center is pretty strong, I could also dominate the c-file.) Plus his knight would be in a bad place. After Ne2 I could do Ba6 (which might not be so necessary but more for freeing up my c-file for rooks) and take over the c-file. Either way his knight does not have so many places to go, and his c-pawn would drop or he would have to trade his c-pawn for my double pawn. (and possibly chances to advance my d pawn instead of trading). 

I don't know why I went into so much analysis for a would be move (I tend to get carried away) But it's more for the reason that I should have kept things simple because my position (I think in this case) was better or I could have still done a lot before f6.