Positional play?

A few weeks ago I had an opportunity to play a pretty strong chess player in a few matches over the board. He's a 2000+ USCF rated played, not quite a master, but nonetheless a strong player. After beating me three times straight, he made an observation about my play. He said something to me that really stuck. He said, "Ty, stop trying to win every game in 5 moves!" 

Since then, I've been trying to play non-gambit openings, which is kinda out of my comfort zone. I've even submitted to studying and playing the Sicilian Defense as black and the Queen's Gambit as white. FINALLY! Hopefully, this will make me a more complete chess player. Instead of trying to 'trick' my opponent, I'm trying to steer the game into positions that I've studied, positions that give me clear ways to either attack or defend. This brings me to my question.

I see and hear chess players referring to 'positional play' or 'positional chess'. I've made the mistake of confusing positional chess with closed games where there are no flash attacks by either side. Well, isn't any chess game positional? What do you think?

Here's a game where I tried to steer the position into a Kan type of Sicilian setup. Please comment.

Here's another game where I tried to get the Kan setup. Comment please.

i love  both. i m feeling weak in my game these days. i often want win the game so less time.it really helpful for me. thanks for it.

You have an abnormally high CC rating.