Seeking comments on this (unfinished) game?

Game is not over.  Almost at endgame.

Any major oversights or flaws so far?

I am now going to run this through SCID also...

Thanks!

I don't give comments on the last moves that could help for the end of the game, as apparently it is not over.

4.Nf3 (and others) : usually White takes the bishop himself. I am not sure of the reason.

13.Rad1 ? "getting the rook opposite to his queen" : you are not dangerous. There are two pawns between these two pieces, that are not even close of getting off the file (unlike what happens moves 14-15). So you are just placing your rook on a closed file. Better Rfe1.

16...Qb4 (?) : the only way to justify 15...d4 was 16...Nxe4. Because otherwise, Black has just improved the white knight's position for nothing (...Nxe4 creates a weak pawn).

17.c3 ? loses a pawn after 17...Nxe4 ! (18.dxe4 dxc3 ; 18.cxb4 Nxd2 19.Rxd2 cxb4).

21.Be5 ? is poor inspiration. 21.Rd7 ! was indeed the way to go. (21.Rd7) 21...Nc3 is met by 22.Re1 that protects from the fork on e2 and defends the pawn.

22.Rfe1 ? is only losing a tempo, as there will be a trade on the d file.

17.c3 ? loses a pawn after 17...Nxe4 ! (18.dxe4 dxc3 ; 18.cxb4 Nxd2 19.Rxd2 cxb4).

Sorry this makes no sense.  These moves can not be made.  18 cxb4 can not be done.  Is there s typo?

Yes it can be played.

Jackofallhobbies,

In general, these types of closed positions are very positional and not very good learning material for the new player. Many concepts need to be woven together to come up with a good move. In positions where tactics reign, one can mostly look at the tactics to find a good move, with relatively few positional considerations. This game from the start is closed and positional ... not suited for a few quick comments.

That said....

5.d3 is perhaps passive. 5.d4 is more lively. But I'm not an expert in the Sicilian. What do I know? 5.d3 seems solid enough, but perhaps giving up any hope for a White advantage. But at your level, these small advantages mean little.

7.Be3?! seems passive. I would go for 7.Bg5, fighting for the center. This eliminates any idea by Black to play ...d5-d4, or even perhaps ...Ng4 chasing the two bishops. Again, I'm not sure is the best move against the passive Be3, but by playing Bg5 it's merely avoiding a useful idea that Black can have.

9...o-o or better 9...b5, gaining space on the Q-side is what I see as a good idea here. ...d5 does not seem horrible, just not what I would play.

I agree that 17.c3 loses a pawn.

But all these specific moves are meaningless. What White needs to do is come up with ideas. Moves appear from ideas. Individual moves on their own don't help one improve. Before 13.Rad1 White needs to make a plan based on hi understanding of the position. What I would do is try to blunt Black's likely expansion on the Q-side and play in the center. Of course, this is not the only (or even the best) plan. So 13.Rad1 actually adheres to this plan. Perhaps you made this move for the "wrong" reasons. But 13.Rad1 prepares d4, which fights for control of the e5 square. This square could be a pivot point for White's pieces. If Black takes with ...cxd4, then White can begin to attack the isolated Black d5-pawn. The rook on d1 would be in position to do that.

13.Rad1 is actually kind of slow, however, now that I look at it. Black can stop White in his tracks with 13...d4 himself! This gains Black space in the center and keeps Black's slight advnatage. 13.Ne5 might, with piece play, mix things up enough to give White enough time to play d4. Hard to say without spending more time or giving the position to an engine. But this is how my thought process proceeds as I look at the position before move 13. I would now look at 13.Ne5 as a candidate.

If I give a position to an engine, I'm doing two things: I'm blunder checking and I'm verifying ideas. I'm not looking for it to blindly suggest moves, because I have no understanding of the ideas behind these moves.

Look at your game, come up with alternative ideas, put the candidate moves into the engine, and then see if your ideas can be carried out. If the ideas stink, there will be a tactical flaw or some other flaw the engine sees. In this way, one can use an engine.

Ask 100 (weak) players (like us) what they think of your game and you'll get 100 different answers! :)