"Blunders" that win the game?

If you wish to improve, then no, you shouldn't.

This is called hope chess. Generally the only time when it is fine to play hope chess is when you are already lost and you are playing for tricks. If you are lost, then you have nothing to lose, and then it is better to try to trick the opponent than to play "the best" moves and lose peacefully.

When you are ahead or equal, you should try to find the best moves you can. You had many opportunities in this game to get free material. The best way to improve for now would be to try to capitalize more on those opportunities, and to avoid giving free material to your opponent.

Hope chess, that makes sense. I'll keep grinding and try to improve. Thanks for the feedback.

You're welcome.

Same! Just now I sacrificed a rook to make an undefended knight at the background but it said it was a blunder.😅😆

Well, that was in a 3|0 blitz game and the opponent had 9 seconds left, so you would've won with pretty much anything that isn't a checkmate for the opponent. But if it was a long game where time wasn't an issue, of course it would be a straight up blunder. He could simply take that rook with the knight, and that would be that.

Playing for tricks has its usage in lost positions (ok in short time controls as well, because the opponent might lose on time trying to figure out your trick), but if you wish to learn to play chess well, you shouldn't do it in an equal game, as it creates bad habbits.

Of course all of that if you wish to improve in the first place. There are people who just want's to have a little laugh with their games, a bit of fun to pass the time, and in their case, it is completely fine.

"Hope chess" is almost the equivalent of a student bringing a piece of paper with notes to an examination (which bans notes from being brought into the examination hall) and hoping that the invigilator does not catch the student.

I like the move 15...dxc3 after 15. Qd3.

Just play normal chess and don’t go for any of  this nonsense! You played 14. d4 to fork the knight and the queen. Just capture the knight, don’t do any tricks cuz you’ll win up a piece and these risks are not worth taking.

Dont try to be fancy and play ‘zwichenzugs’ for no reason.  17.Ne5 is just terrible. Your opponent played Nb5 to attack your queen. If you don’t respond to the threat they are going to take your queen. I have no idea why did they decline the Botez Gambit, cuz black is just losing a piece by force after Nxd6 Nxd3 Nf5. 
after 23. gxh4, white can play Kh1- Rg1- and try to check mate you.

Which isn’t very good.

But Bh4 tells me that if Qxg4 you have a knight fork,  so you aren’t that bad at visualizing the board and the pieces on it. Try to find the best moves every time, and you’ll reach 1000 in no time.

Well, now imagine cheating on an exam that is extremely easy and you know everything and you will surely pass anyway. The Bh4 move is the equivalent of that.

If white is bad enough that he falls for this trick, then there is absolutely no reason for the trick, because white will blunder and lose anyway.

NICE🥵😎

Definitely. When I review the game, the engine was like "why are you not taking on c3?" like 2  moves in a row if I recall. This is exactly where I feel I need to improve... Capitalizing on the basic chances I have to win material and better visualizing of exchange sequences. The comments I've gotten here have been extremely helpful. I have stopped playing the nonsense that prompted my question in the first place and my ELO is up 100 points. It's clearly a much sounder way to play. 

That is a very good metaphor for this situation. Thank you

No you're 100% right. White is definitely winning.  That was just my thought process during the game (it was wrong).

I'm playing with a different mindset now after getting some great comments from people here. 

After reading your comment I decided to dig a little deeper into what you were saying and I stumbled upon some great resources and articles that I'd like to share. 

The first I came to was actually by you Nikola and I thought it was a very solid set of recommendations for beginners.  

The Beginner’s Tale – First Steps To Chess Improvement

The others I came to were by Dan Heisman 

Passive vs Basic Hope Chess

I think Dan is speaking about a slightly different type of Hope Chess but definitely applies to my play and I think is a very helpful article for people stuck in the 600-700 range and wondering why. 

Same goes for this article. The Greatly Misunderstood and Potentially Challenging Tactic

Counting was definitely an overlooked tactic for me and trying to get better with I think has yielded some tangible progress for me.

And with that, I'll post my last game  which I think consisted of more real chess and not the nonsense of the first game in question. 

Just wanted to thank you Nikola and everyone else who has commented for the supportive feedback. 

I did not realize how bad 17. Ne5 was but you are right. It's fair to say that this was a lazy game by me. "Try to find the best moves every time" is great advice. 

You're welcome. I am glad that you've liked the article.

Very good game by the way.

damn

It's more of the thought that runs in our heads.

What you might have thought on move 15 is this.

1. My queen is defended by bishop.

2. If pawn takes knight, the queen will capture my queen.

But somehow, these ideas do not integrate into the mind and we might have falsely believed that taking the knight will lead to the loss of the queen, forgetting that it is defended in the first place. Thus, we are too scared to capture the knight.

Calculation errors and limitations actually cover a wide range of areas. From the laziness to calculate lines to a miscalculation deep within a line and even hallucinations, these affect a lot of players, and yes, this does not preclude myself. Not to worry, you will be able to gain the ideas and incorporate it in your future games as you strive to reduce such occurrences on the board.