There we go. I'm the winning side on all games. Bolster my ego furth--I mean analyse the game.
Some nice shots in those games...Of course with a lot of help. But, nicely played. I definitely can't analyze any games where the dutch gets crushed ;P. But, you should really post some games you have lost.
bxe5...White still seems to get the advantage
btw weapon king. I don't know if you noticed. But post 43 was some analysis of the actual game you played that you drew.
Yeah, I saw that. Since the position's drawish to begin with, there's not much of anything FOR me to threaten. The Nf5-d6-e4 idea was to simply hold the position together. Black can't really improve his kingside any more, and any queenside action looks like it will favor White. Might seem unambitious, but it's foolish to ruin your position simply out of boredom.
And on your last post...
Very interesting. I have to look deeper into that.
Which position are you talking about, Owlmoon?
Your post above.
Oh. Sorry, it just seems like we have two or three discussions going at once in here. 
It's alright.
Here's one for you. 1. e4 b5??
Wow. Interesting game above. I wonder what your opponent was thinking.
Yeah, I saw that. Since the position's drawish to begin with, there's not much of anything FOR me to threaten. The Nf5-d6-e4 idea was to simply hold the position together. Black can't really improve his kingside any more, and any queenside action looks like it will favor White. Might seem unambitious, but it's foolish to ruin your position simply out of boredom.
And on your last post...
You aren't reading my notes!!...the c pawn isn't actually there in the position you had
and @weapon king the fact is you HAVE to play actively w/ b-b5 because your light square bishop is basically dead and his is helping a kingside attack (which you were lucky he didn't try). Read post 43 again closely
I realized that the c7 pawn was not there. I also realize that Black has a problemchild on c8. I'm also aware of the fact that Black's chances lie on the queenside. I'd be foolish to not know the basic ideas behind the openings and defenses that I play.
I simply don't buy that White has an overwhelming advantage. If he's that hell-bent on holding on to c5, then by all means, let him. Blind materialism gets punished in chess.
If you realized that the c7 pawn wasn't there then why in your line did you play c6 in response to b-b5?
And it still seems as though you didn't read post 43(or didn't understand what I was saying)
"And your n-e7-f5-d6-e4 idea can't be right. Even if you get the knight to e4 are you really threatening anything? By the way white can either prevent it with g4 and your dead bishop and cramped knights aren't going to make his king unsafe(while there is a pawn storm looming-but white can build up slowly as he would like-maybe k-h1, r-g1 or a rook lift, n-f6, f5 etc..keep in mind these are all just ideas.). Or he can play k-h1 and after your n-f5 let g4 accelerate his attack.
My thoughts...I thought the ne7 idea was best to possibly play bd7 -b4 if allowed(the doubled pawn can be pushed-double minority attack). Well, if white takes the bishop....aren't we happy that we have taken away an attacker against our kingside "
I have bolded some of the points I think you are missing in the previous post(no need to get defensive by the way.). That light squared bishop is an important attacker against your king(even if your opponent didn't use it in the game) and that pawn storm is very dangerous it seems to me(especially if you just sit on your position)
edit....The bold didn't look very bold so I tried italicizing-see if that works
Okay fair enough, I forgot about the pawn in that line. Also, I know full well that White can do kingside attacks in the Stonewall. I realize this idea, and I use this idea. I've had these attacks succeed, and I've had these attacks fail depending on how my opponent defends. To illustrate how I view the Stonewall as an attacking weapon, I present this more recent blitz game.
True, I didn't probably play the best moves, but I do understand how the Stonewall can be used for attack. My point though, is that with accurate play from both sides, a Stonewall game becomes more of a positional struggle than a hack 'n' slash game. Basically, I was confident in my ability to resist White's efforts on the kingside while pursuing my own designs on the queenside. For whatever reason, my friend deemed it pointless to try for a kingside attack and so I was unable to test my theory.
Anyway, I just think that White's getting a little too much credit here. Black's got some things in his own hand of cards. You just have to look for them.
just noticed your game satux...
2. d4!? I say take the pawn and make them take time to win the pawn back. I showed a sample line..maybe its hard to "calculate" that line otb. But, personally I would just recognize that even if I can't keep the pawn white has to play f5 or he can't claim comp and I will be ahead in development with the black king slightly airy because of f5..
It won't let me post a line..BUt, my line was...
1. e4, b5 2. bxb5!?, b-b7 3. d3, f5 4. nc3, nf6 5. N-f3!?,fxe 6. dxe, nxe4 7. nxe4, bxe4 8. n-e5!? now bxg2 loses pretty clearly to r-g1 because of the weakness that 3...f5 created. So 8...c6. But, I think 9. q-b4 is winning(complicated, but seems to be winning to me. Take a look its an interesting position)
Back to your actual game satux...I liked how you played up until move 13(I actually would have played the exact same moves up until then. I kept thinking wow, this guy is reading my mind he must be cheating haha). Okay I am back to the real world now lol. Anyways, did you forgot the rook on a8 wasn't hanging? I think it was positionally unsound to allow the exchange of those pawns. The a pawn was his main weakness.
Better, I think, would have been b-e3 with the idea of doubling rooks on the a file while at the same time preventing the c5 break...If you were doing it with the idea of bringing the rook into the kingside attack then it may be a good move....But, wait for black to commit to the kingside first and see if it is appropriate at that time. At least that is my opinion. You can never move pawns backwards..
I like the b-b5 idea...but for reasons stated before it doesn't seem as strong(although your opponent fell right into it) and the rest of your attack was played out well.
Nice game
True. In this case, however, I think the justification is pretty obvious.