One of the two main points of analytical interest in this game actually occurs quite early on, with move 6. Black makes a standard-looking developing move (...Nbd7), which is in fact an unintended pawn sacrifice, a fact which I spotted immediately afterwards. The variations that flow from the initial tactic, which involves a queen fork on b5, show a dynamic balance between material on the one side, and piece activity and placement on the other, that is worth studying. White however avoids the line, instead relieving the central pawn tension with 7. c5, at the same time gaining a bit of space on the queenside. I usually am perfectly happy to see these types of moves, since they pose no immediate problems and offer possibilities of counterplay by attacking the head of the pawn chain.
The second main point of interest is the 17th (and last) move of the game. As played, it was the result of a misclick, the electronic equivalent of a touch-move fault in an over-the-board (OTB) tournament. With 16. e4, TomG had thrown down the gauntlet in the center and I was forced to consider the various permutations of pawn exchanges and follow-up moves. Unfortunately, this type of pawn structure is a particular weakness for me, as I have trouble calculating and evaluating it. However, that makes it all the more important for me to play. My intended move (17...Qe5) was fine on the surface, but would in fact have lead to a significant White plus following the next round of exchanges. Taking with the pawn in the center would have led to equality instead.
Props to TomG for a well-played game until that point, which despite the premature ending still provided value to me in the post-game analysis process.