I agree that this move is too committal on behalf of white. It forces white to defend the position of his bishop, which gives black some opening initiative which is usually reserved for white.

The bishop isn't doing anything after pawn to e6 blocks it off. Well, unless you give him the opportunity for a sacrifice on e6 later.....

I agree... I have gone this way quite a few times myself. The idea is that you kick the bishop around while allowing your fiancettoed bishop on b7 to aim at his inevitable kingside castle. It just never works out for some reason (I rarely get a winning position from it, that is), probably because it's very passive. Passivity rarely wins in chess unless your opponent blunders. But you should be playing with the assumption that your opponent won't blunder, since if you get good enough, your competition doesn't blunder very often any more.

I wouldn't have done the bishop move e7 personally. I don't think it adds much to the position. Developing the knight is better... I think even b5 is better. Or perhaps offering the trade on c6, which would attack white's very strong center.

This was very good indeed. I was questioning the f4 pawn boost, but this allows suddenly a very strong attack on white's kingside.

This was probably true. It's one of those undeniable but difficult to learn rules in chess; always chose the position over the material

Perhaps, but white's position is incredible strong here. Black's kingside defense is completely disrutped, white has two passed pawns aimed at black's king, and white can bring his rook and queen right into the fray. I don't know how it turns out, but white should have won this fairly easily.

I agree with you here. Although this pushes white ahead in material, he loses his momentum against black's king by removing the main attacker. White should have increased the threat on black's king

This is an impatient move. White needed a little more pressure to open you up. I would have thought that Nd5 would have broken your defence to allow the Queen to come in on h5.

Agreed. I think white blundered his advantage. Sometimes you have to "keep the tension" and not be so quick to trade down when you have potential attacks. Tactics is what wins chess games.

I agree again. I think white should have maybe brought the rook over without castling, developed the bishop, and then maybe castled queenside, if at all.

I like castling here - yes a king in the middle is good for the endgame but there are plenty of pieces on the board and in anycase where does the king go? d2 and f2 are blocked and e2 risks rook checks on the open files. Castling here is safest.