I think that I remember a position almost as the one Diakonia posted. And c5-Nb1-Na3-Nc4-Nd6 looks good.
i Wanna improve :)
... " Morphy's games of chess" ... Philip-Sergeant ...is it a good book?
It is discussed, along with A First Book of Morphy by Frisco Del Rosario, here:
https://www.chess.com/blog/Chessmo/review-a-first-book-of-morphy
If you want lots of Morphy games, you can find about 300 of them in Sergeant's book, but I do not think it has ever been converted to algebraic. There is game commentary, but, of course, with so many games, there is less room for explanation in any one of them. On the other hand, there is more about Morphy's life than you are likely to find in any book written in the last two decades. Lawson's Morphy book covered his life very thoroughly, and perhaps subsequent authors have felt it best to not devote too much space to biographical information. Del Rosario selected a much smaller number of games "to illustrate basic principles" (using algebraic notation).
In his book, Morphy: Move by Move, GM Franco uses Morphy's games for instruction at a somewhat higher level than the instruction in the Del Rosario book.
https://www.newinchess.com/Shop/Images/Pdfs/7625.pdf
The quality of Morphy's play is a particular focus of GM Beim in his book, Paul Morphy: A Modern Perspective.
http://theweekinchess.com/john-watson-reviews/historical-and-biographical-works-installment-2
Everyman Chess has recently reprinted an examination of selected Morphy games by Chris Ward.
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708234305/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/morph.txt
Perhaps the most complete readily available Morphy game collection can be found in a Dover reprint of a study of Morphy by Shibut. If I remember correctly, Shibut was primarily concerned with the role of Morphy in the evolution of chess.
Just four years ago, it became possible to obtain an English translation of the monumental 1909 study of Morphy's games by Maroczy.
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708095424/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review845.pdf
Staunton's Morphy commentary (primarily of historical interest) can be found in a recent reprint of Chess Praxis by Staunton. If you share my interest in what was written about Morphy around 1860, you might want to also look into reprints (in the last few decades) of works (about Morphy) by Lange and Loewenthal.
... What is a "weak" pawn and how do you spot them. Also, how do i make use of holes in my opponents side
Those ideas (and others) are introduced in Simple Chess by Michael Stean.
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708104258/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review400.pdf
Some nonMorphy books with substantial commentary about Morphy:
Secrets of Attacking Chess by Mihail Marin
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708092913/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review494.pdf
Improve Your Chess by Learning from the Champions by Lars Bo Hansen
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708095920/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review724.pdf
Chess Secrets: The Giants of Power Play by Neil McDonald
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708112104/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review711.pdf
The Book of The First American Chess Congress, New York 1857 Edited by Daniel Fiske
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708095613/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review355.pdf
Garry Kasparov on My Great Predecessors, Part I by Garry Kasparov with Dmitry Plisetsky
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708110300/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review385.pdf
Play Chess Like the PROs by Danny Gormally https://web.archive.org/web/20140708090724/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review760.pdf
(Ironic that Morphy was discussed in a book with that title.)
<snip>
I would play c5 to hold on to d6
<snip>
1. d5 is the first move I'd look at, even though it leaves the e-pawn unguarded, because d5 is the focal point for the power of all White's pieces, which become active and threatening after exchanges on d5, and 2. d6 is a serious threat. Only if that does not work (or cannot be made to work with some preparation) would I look more seriously at the other, slower, candidate moves, such as c5. I start off with mistrust of moves like c5 that take all the tension and dynamism out of a position unless it is clear that they give the result you are after.
What do any strong players think?