There are many small nuances I could discuss with this game, but I don't want to feel like I'm nit-picking a million different things, so let me simply address some of my biggest takeaways here:
- Let's start with 19...dxe5 20. Bxe5 "Now what?" question. The plan is actually pretty straight-forward. White should complete their piece development. How about planning ideas like Qd3 to get the Queen to a good square and connect the Rooks? How about getting the unmoved a1 Rook into the game? Another idea might be to relocate the e3 Knight to somewhere more active than mostly looking at its own pawns; one plan might be Ne3-Nf1-Ng3-Ne4 and hoping to add pressure to the c5 pawn.
- Next, let's examine from the 4...Na5 mistake. Your 5. Bxf7+ line is correctly calculated, but your final assessment was: "this is probably winning but couldn't calculate. So i went with the safer choice." If you believed that line was winning, then why wouldn't you play it? Furthermore, you abandon a line you believe to be winning for a line you didn't even offer calculation and assessment for? Calculate 5. Nxe5 Nxc4 and make your assessment of this position and then only go with it if you believe it to be "more winning" than the Bxf7+ line you abandoned.
I'm sure you have checked this with the computer analysis afterwards and realized that the line you chose was close to equal, but the Bxf7+ line is crushing; not winning by a little, but crushing! Their King looks ridiculous on e6 and the engine claims white like over +2.00 evaluation. The line you went with was almost equal.
- My last observation I don't want to get too detailed with, but you missed a lot of things I would expect most 1900 rated players to already know. For instance, the Bxf7+ line should be opening theory for you and not something you struggle to calculate mid-game. This is only 4 moves into the game and 5. Bxf7+ is an obvious candidate move to look at (look for checks, captures and threats and this move is a check and a capture...and similarly very forcing).
On that same note, the "now what?" question was answered by piece development and this is something players even much lower rated know well; it is drilled into most players after all. All many people hear are cliché lines like "don't hang pieces" and "follow opening principles."
My critique may sound harsh. I don't want it to sound only that way. On the contrary, 1900+ rating is a huge accomplishment and you don't get to this rating by accidentally stumbling onto it. You must be a really knowledgeable chess player to reach that level. My prediction is that these questions aren't really about chess ability, but actually about chess burnout. Yes, I suspect that if you weren't burnt out, then even you could see these things I'm highlighting.
We all need a break sometimes and taking a few days (I wouldn't go more than a week, except for extreme situations) break from chess might help you mentally refresh.
This is the entire game, I am gonna breakdown the points up ahead a bit