But that seems way too simple, even for a Tuesday, so there must be a mate in the works (and it smells like one with the knights encircling a cramped king).

NN would not have hidden his name. It is usually the victor who replaces his opponent’s real name with NN to spare his blushes after an embarrassing defeat.

Overall, I find black's moves to be plausible if not particularly good. So my vote is that this was a real game. It does not have quite the Prince Dadian whiff of composition.

But I couldn't help looking at the position at move 16 and wondering whether black could have wriggled out. 16. ... Be7 does nothing to help his stalemated king. We need to make some luft - how about 16. ... Qg7 instead?

Fritz 11 finds that white's 16. Qxf6 was not the best move. 16. ... Qg7 does prevent the mate (as does Qe7). After 17. Nf7+, white picks up the h8 rook but there is no immediate mate in sight. Fritz rates as +1.8.

Fritz does find a mate in 9 for white. Instead of 16. Qxf6, Fritz points out:

As you quite rightly say, NN means not known. But this does not mean that NN was trying to hide his name as <al wazir> suggested.

NN is sometimes used when the name is known, but there is no point in giving it - ie the person is an unknown or would be needlessly embarrassed by having a loss publicised. It used to be seen as a courtesy when a master published a particularly one-sided game against an amateur.

So you put Fritz 11 to the task, eh? I'm glad it confirmed and extended the line I eyeballed (see my post above in response to <al wazir>).

According to Fritz, your line is also a forced mate. It's a little longer than 19. Kf1 as it gives Black a couple of spite checks with Qxh2+ and Bd6+. But the black king stuck so far into white territory can only mean one thing.

click for larger view

Sometimes it's really hard to figure out how a pawn got past the opponent's pawns.