Scathing Analysis by Rybka and Chess.Com

I played this game earlier today, and it was a very satisfying win for me (my opponent was rated higher than me), but Rybka and Chess.com engines said I had a losing posistion all the way through. I am posting this game in analysis, because I would really like some advice on my position if it really was bad, or my opponent just didn't respond the right way. Sometimes I just don't understand the engines. Thanks guys, hope you enjoy the game.

A quick edit, I say the fork at H3 in three this was incorrect I think it was 4 or 5. I also put some annotations behind moves I hope this doesn't confuse anyone, sorry in advance if it does. :)

Kerry

You got many lucky breaks from your opponent.

1) Your opponent won a pawn early in the opening.

2) Your bishop sack lead to nothing

3) Your fork was not at all forced, easily could have been avoided. 

4) Even after the fork, you would have still been in a losing position if your opponent played precisely. 

5) You really should focus on the lines offered by the chess engine as improvements and try to understand why they are better. Most of us play terribly by the standards of the silicone beasts, but they can help us learn. 

congratulation first of all, since i play the dragon for ages now i say u did well for the first 15 moves except possibly for 3...Nc6 this is not usual if u plan for the dragon since u already played ....d6 leaving ur king side undeveloped and 5...a6 which weakens ur pawn structure , now 16...Bxh3? this is sure a mistake i have never seen such sac in serious games its not supported by any other piece ,u r only a piece down for nothing , then 20....Bxc3 ?!  as a basic rule in the dragon dont exchange ur dragon bishop even for a rook, its one of ur master weapons until end of game it was too early and risky to asume that he will be trapped in that fork after 4 moves and how did u expect him to make that terrible blunder at move 24 ?,,,,now white blunders was really something , ur fork plan was excellent that was early planned but why on earth did he play 24 Bxf5 ?? even if he didnt notice the fork why to exchange a bishop for a pawn  ??? then the final blunder 32Be3?? it was an obvious mate even though his position was terrible he would better resign than this move, i can see u played well putting a plan on head but he helped u to the extreme to slaughter him

Completely correct.

Yes, how dare you try to learn something! (sarcasm)

Thanks for the comments, everyone.

Im not a good player by any means yet, but Im working on it :)

Thanks for the constructive criticism jedominguez.

Yes, even after the K and Q fork, white has a way out. 

And it is VERY possible for even us humans to have found white's variation that would've secured his advantage.  I'd say it is even probable that a reasonably strong player could find it the right moves.  When a good player is down in material, he will often look for FORCING moves. 

Be6+ is obvious, and the response of Kh8 is forced.  Rg1 threatens mate, and the FORCED response is Rg8...which leads to a forced trade of rooks and forced loss of the queen. 

Going through computer analysis is a good way to learn.  However, in my opinion, you could probably get the most value out of simply studying tactics.  There were a lot of tactical mistakes made on both sides.  The best way to study tactics is to:

a) go out and buy a tactics book with hundreds or thousands of tactical puzzles.

b) start using chess tactics trainer here on chess.com

A daily diet of tactics will probably improve your rating by 100 points in the short to intermediate term.