@bsb2000 - Some of the moves I used are sketchy... however the ideas are there for you to digest. Notice your knight's activity against the g4 pawn, king infiltration on the queen side, and the principle of two weaknesses at work in your position. I think it narrowly creates a victory for black because white will end up in Zugzwang eventually.
Post your game for expert analysis

@heister: thank you very much for restoring faith in the open Sicilian!
Now that is a positional bind. I like the psychological move 15. Bd3. Your opponent played quite reasonable, because he could not execute his best move, as that would imply that he had to accept that he was playing a lost game.
I would definitely prefer white in the position after 11. Nb5.
If I would play your game I might have started looking for a mate too, because the knights are on the other side of the board and they are normally the best defenders for a king. (One of the reasons that a knight is less strong in a lot of other positions compared to the strength of the majority of attacking pieces.)
The variations I saw were (I left 17... exf4 out of analysis, because it is a very passive move.):
16. Qh5 g6 17. Bxg6 hxg6 18. Qxg6+ Kh8 19. Bxe5+ and mate to follow,
but black should have answered after 17. Bxg6 with 17... Re7 18. Qg5 Re8
(18... hxg6 19. Bxe7 Qe8 20. Nd6 loses the queen) 19. Bxe8+ Qxg5 20. fxg5 Nxc4 and black has lost a rook and won a pawn. Getting mated looks a more reasonable way of play to me, because it is hard to imagine that you can believe in a good plan being a rook down.
16. Qh5 h6 17. Qg6 Qf6 18. Qh7+ Kf7 19. Bxe5 Qh4+ 20. g3 Qg4 21. Nd6+ Ke7 22. Nxe8 Kxe8 23. Bg6+ Kf8 24. Qh8+ Ke7 25. Qxg7+ Kd8 26. Qf8#
There are a lot of moves not forced in that second variation, but the alternatives are only alternative ways of losing the game.

Here I played against a 2100 who defeated and drew the runner up of my state's amateur championship (not during it but at the club) with 60 minutes per side so I guess there's no shame in losing this one. Be warned, I included a stem game just because I feel proud of playing the same moves as a 2750+ without even being aware that the game or even player existed:
@Ryanurocks - Now the great reveal? Who was your chess teacher :D
Sorry, I didn't notice that my game had been analyzed for a while. I was considering 55. Qxd3, but after a few minutes analysis, I realized it falls to 55... Qb3, which wins the bishop. Did I actually play at that rating for that game? I know I played well, but I definitely did not think That would be the rating at which I played. As for my chess teacher, he's not really well known or anything, he's just a chess teacher that lives close to where I live.

@Ryanurocks - I don't know the algorithm that chesszen.com uses to calculate your play rating for a specific game. It probably has something to do with how closely your moves match the various computer engine moves. According to them, you certainly played that well. Congrats.
p.s. I offered you a chance to give some good PR to a good chess teacher, please take it!
@Ryanurocks - I don't know the algorithm that chesszen.com uses to calculate your play rating for a specific game. It probably has something to do with how closely your moves match the various computer engine moves. According to them, you certainly played that well. Congrats.
p.s. I offered you a chance to give some good PR to a good chess teacher, please take it!
But that's the thing. He finished his class, and all I can ever remember refering to him as was Mr. Jones.

Hello guys this game being posted was extremely tactical pls point out if I missed a tactic from my opponents side.
THANKS A LOT!!

I'm working pretty heavily in other areas right now. I'll have to swing back for the games I have skipped. Thx for being patient with me!

@LoekBergman - I hope to restore your faith in this line. ;) Enjoy