[Event "World Open U2200"]
[Site "Philadelphia"]
[Date "2001.07.??"]
[Round "7"]
[White "Hartwig, Tom"]
[Black "Thomas, Rodney"]
[Result "1-0"]
[Annotator "Hartwig,Th"]
[ECO "B33"]
[PlyCount "43"]

1. e4 { I had actually prepared 1.d4 for the tournament, but I backed out in every (!) game for various different reasons. In this case it was because things were in such a rut I would only be cheered by winning in crushing style.  Thankfully it worked! } 1... c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e5 6. Ndb5 d6 7. Bg5 a6 8. Na3 b5 9. Bxf6 gxf6 { Everyone "knows" this move, of course, but is it understanding or rote? Generally I like to quickly play through in my head, every time, why 9...Qxf6 is bad, and I think this helps me to get my mind running as we approach the point where theory stops. } ( 9... Qxf6 10. Nd5 Qd8 11. c4 $1 b4 12. Qa4 Bd7 13. Nb5 $1 axb5 14. Qxa8 Qxa8 15. Nc7+ Kd8 16. Nxa8 { is the relavent line. The knight escapes via b6, so white is winning. } ) 10. Nd5 f5 11. c3 { 11.exf5 first is also possible, but this move sets a trap. Already I had played the white side of this position three times, and no-one had taken on e4. My opponent was thinking. Dared I hope he might not know the trap? } 11... fxe4 $4 { He falls for it. On the one hand the refutation is not trivial, in fact I had some trouble remembering it. However, I was still very surprised as it is something one should know if they are going to play the Pelikan. } 12. Bxb5 $1 axb5 13. Nxb5 Qg5 { Definitely the most resiliant. My memory did not serve here so we were both on our own, but I used the process of elimination to guide me through the next couple moves, knowing the resulting position should be winning for white. } ( 13... Qa5 14. a4 $5 ( 14. Nf6+ Kd8 15. Nxd6 { also looks very strong. } ) 14... Ra7 15. Nf6+ Kd8 16. b4 { and the queenside pawns become extremely dangerous. } ) ( 13... Ra7 { just loses thanks to the interpolation of 11. c3 fxe4: } 14. Nxa7 Nxa7 15. Qa4+ ) ( 13... Ra5 { loses for the same reason: } 14. Nbc7+ Kd7 15. Qg4+ ) 14. Nbc7+ ( 14. Ndc7+ Kd8 15. Nxa8 Qxg2 16. Rf1 Bh3 { is much less good. } ) 14... Kd8 15. Nxa8 Qxg2 16. Rf1 Ba6 17. Ne3 Qxh2 ( 17... Qh3 { would be met in a similar way: } 18. Qa4 Bxf1 19. Qxc6 Bd3 20. Qc7+ Ke8 21. Qb8+ Kd7 22. Nb6+ Kc6 ( 22... Ke6 23. Qc8+ ) 23. Qa8+ $1 Kxb6 24. Nd5+ Kc5 25. b4+ Kb5 26. Qb7+ Ka4 27. Qa7+ Kb5 28. Qb6+ Kc4 29. Qc6# ) 18. Qa4 ( 18. Qb3 { was also winning: } 18... Bxf1 19. Qb6+ Kd7 20. Qb7+ $1 Ke6 21. Nc7+ $1 Kf6 22. Ng4+ ) 18... Bxf1 19. Qxc6 $1 { I did see 19.Nxf1 but I decided to win more devastatingly by leaving the knight in play for a direct attack. } 19... Bh3 ( 19... Bd3 20. Qc7+ Ke8 21. Qc8+ Ke7 22. Nd5# ) 20. O-O-O $1 { Not only threatening to sack the rook, but also to take d6 with the queen if I entice his majesty to e7. } 20... Bd7 $2 { Black assumes I want to sack the rook and accidentally amplifies my main threat, denying me a prettier finish. } ( 20... Qxf2 21. Qc7+ ( 21. Rxd6+ { is also possible: } 21... Bxd6 22. Qxd6+ Bd7 23. Qb8+ Bc8 24. Qc7+ Ke8 25. Qxc8+ Ke7 26. Nd5+ Kd6 27. Qa6+ Kxd5 28. Nc7+ Kc5 29. b4# ) 21... Ke8 22. Qb8+ Kd7 23. Nb6+ Kc6 ( 23... Ke6 24. Qc8+ Kf6 25. Qxh3 ) 24. Qa8+ $1 { The key idea, which might have been a more fitting finish: } 24... Kxb6 25. Nd5+ Kc5 26. b4+ Kb5 27. c4+ Kxc4 28. Qa6# ) 21. Qb6+ Ke8 22. Qb8+ { After black resigned a spectator, who had been playing his own game one board down, shook my hand. I was quite cheered up, but still I had to wonder, with the advanced state of theory these days, if this whole game might not have been played before by someone else. } 1-0