This 97-99% accuracy game proves that I don't cheat

This game sheds light on why people shouldn't rely on Accuracy Scores from Computer Reviews to 'inform' their 'accusations' *coughs* Vladimir Crumbnik *coughs* the game is standard isolani stuff until the move which won the game, 15...Re4:

https://www.chess.com/game/live/113008825607

I spent 15 seconds deciding on this move, however, CC's Game Review says that "Re4 is good" but that "g5 is best."

15...g5 would never occur to me in a blitz game - it's completely inhuman - so I got an infinite depth analysis for a second opinion and 15...Re4 was not one of the 5 top engine suggestions:

To put it simply, 15...Re4 won this game, but it is not a computer move, in fact, it might be the most human move on the board. The reason is that computers don't play like humans - they don't miss any tactics and in this case would play 16.Ne5 saying that the position is equal - so the computer rejects 15...Re4 because it's a one-move-threat (a cheapo) which won't work against, well, Stockfish. However, my opponent was a 1700 who neglected the tactics and blundered a bishop. (Practical advice from this game is that if your opponent plays a strange move like 15...Re4 they probably did it for concrete tactical reasons as it's certainly not improving their position.)

I just think it's neat that a game with a 97-99% accuracy score is now my best evidence against any future cheating accusations because it demonstrates the admittedly already-known-fact that computer accuracy scores are useless for informing on whether somebody is cheating: human analysis is required because - for the time being - only humans can understand how humans play chess.

16.Nf5*