It's not a bad idea, but usually if a Forum member wants to analyse and discuss his/her game with others, the convention is that he/she does so by either creating a new thread with particular queries or posts a game of his/hers in an existing thread if the game is relevant to the particular topic.

Here's a game I played not very long ago (blitz game) in a currently topical variation of the Nimzo-Indian (I was Black):

[Event "ICC 3 0"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]

1. c4 Nf6 2. d4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. Qc2 d5 5. a3 Bxc3+ 6. Qxc3 Ne4 7. Qc2 c5 8.
dxc5 Nc6 9. e3 Qa5+ 10. Bd2 Nxd2 11. Qxd2 dxc4 12. Qxa5 Nxa5 13. Rc1 b5 14.
cxb6 Bb7 15. bxa7 Ke7 16. Ne2 (this has been popularised by the strong Ukrainian GM Volokitin) Rxa7 17. Nc3 Rb8 18. Na2 Bd5 19. Nb4 Nc6 20.
Nxc6+ Bxc6 21. Rxc4 Bd5?! (The surprising 21...Ba4! would have equalised) 22. Rc2 Rab7 (A new move, which seems stronger than the 22...Rb3 23.f3! Re3 24.Kd2 Rb3 25.Be2 of Drozdovsky-Sargissian, Mainz 2007, when White is clearly better) 23. b4 Ra7 24. Rc3 Rba8 25. f3?! (25.Bd3! Ra3 26.Kd2 Ra2 27.Rc2 Rc2 28.Bc2 is slightly better for White according to Ikonnikov; I think this is an understatement) Rxa3 26.
Rxa3 Rxa3 (Now Black's more active pieces provide him with full compensation for the pawn) 27. Kf2 Ra1 28. Rg1 (28.e4 Bc4=) Rb1 (28...Ra2 was also good) 29. b5 e5? (29...Rb2=) 30. e4? (30.Bd3 Rb2 31.Kg3 is a solid extra pawn for White) Be6 (30...Rb2 was simpler) 31. Be2 Rb2? (31...Rg1 32.Kg1 Kd6 leads to a drawish pawn ending) 32. Rc1 Kd6
33. Ke3 Rb3+ 34. Bd3? (34.Kd2 Rb2 35.Ke1 offered more winning chances) Bd7 35. Kd2 Bxb5 36. Bxb5 Rxb5 and the game eventually ended in a draw.