Bxe5. dxe5 Bxg4 wins a pawn and doubles the pawns

25...Bc3, pinning te knight, looks stronger.

I would have played 27.b6, the passed pawn can be very dangerous..

so obviously he wasn't cheating because the comp. would've said he had an advantage or his brother isn't that good either

Let's see: Black is ahead by a piece for two pawns, an advantage, but not always enough to win. Black has the two bishops and should play on, trying to remove White's pawns and promote his. White's drawing strategy will be to force an exchange of knight for bishop and erect a fortress with a pawn on the opposite colour square to Black's remaining bishop. A difficult endgame, but Black should have continued to fight, especially as he stands no risk now of losing the game. * * * I hope, of course, that your accusation of cheating is a joke and that your opponent is in on the joke (if not, no matter how lightly you meant it, saying that sort of thing could cause serious offence). If it wasn't meant as a joke, you have no right to make accusations just because an opponent you've played before is starting to learn from his mistakes. Learning from our mistakes is how all chessplayers get better at the game; I can tell from your moves that you also have room to improve if you keep playing.

He actually was cheating. He told me so. Why do you insult me? 1690? What right do you have to "coach" players? Your rating is a joke, (but so is mine   )