In your game with Kevin Bailey (2034), I do not know the theory of that variation, but I do not like 5.0-0 because you castle not because you can, but because you need or it is the right moment, and I do not like 5…Bd7 either! After 5.0-0 you allow b5 6.Bb3 Bg4 and if 7.h3 h5 is possible like in the Exchange variation and the White light square bishop is on the other flank and …Qf6 could come threathning to spoil your kingside structure.
Your move 32. ___,e4 was so detrimental to your bishop I could not understand it. First, it gives him a passed pawn and second it blocks your bishop. I had liked your bishop on that diagnol since it could threaten the f, g, and h pawns which were on White squares and would force him to keep the King or Knight there to defend. Of course, your King being on b5 blocked the bishop’s retreat square. Pehaps, with the weak e and h pawns defense was the order of the day.
My above remark was for game 4 against Othman.
It was a time-pressure gamble which didn’t pay off, perhaps motivated somewhat by the hope that he’d just take the pawn and certainly by an excessive desire to win, fuelled by my previous losses.