Rail2Rail Nails It

As predicted, Rail2Rail has won his double round robin Jerome Gambit tournament at ChessWorld.

He was followed by dandoo, who lost a vital step on the leader by dropping a game on time to tailender calchess10.

On the other hand, the runner-up played a snappy game that helped distance himself from the middle of the pack:

dandoo - Piratepaul
JG2 thematic www.chessworld.net, 2008
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.d4 exd4 6.Ng5+ Kg6 7.h4 d6 8.h5+ Kf6 9.Qf3+ Ke5 10.Nf7+ 1–0

"Stay alert!" would be a good title for the following game, won by the third place finisher.


blackburne - eddie43
JG2 thematic www.chessworld.net, 2008

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 Bd4



A novel way to return a piece with hopes of breaking the attack, although it turns out to be more of a "TL" than "TN".

8.fxe5 Bxe5 9.Qf5+ Kd6 10.0–0

White, in turn, takes the position a bit too casually. With 10.d4 he could have shown an advantage in the game. Instead, he "castles into it."

10...Qh4

Stronger was 10...Qf6. Even so, Black is now clearly better.

11.h3 Qg3 12.Rf2 Nf6

Black looks like he has a killer position, and he would have, if his Knight had gone to either e7 or h6 instead. As it is, he gives White a chance.

13.d4 Bxd4 14.Bf4+ Kc6 15.Bxg3 Bxf2+ 16.Bxf2 d6

The smoke has cleared, and White has the winning advantage of a Queen for a Rook.

17.Qa5 Nxe4 18.Qa4+ Kd5 19.Nc3+ Nxc3 20.bxc3 Ke6 21.Re1+ Kf6 22.Qf4+ Kg6 23.Re3 Bf5 24.Rg3+ Kf6 25.Bd4+ Ke6 26.Re3+ Kd7 27.Qxf5+ Kd8 28.Bxg7 Rg8 29.Bf6 checkmate

The Salvio Gambit?? [more]

Searching for the link between the 17th century Italian chess player Salvio and the Jerome Gambit – 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ – I had come upon J.H. Sarratt's translation of Salvio's works... see "The Salvio Gambit??"

Salvio presented a number of "games" in the Giuoco Piano section of his book, in five of which the first player sacrificed his Bishop for the pawn on his opponent's King Bishop Two square [f7/e7]. For the most part I have translated the descriptive notation to algebraic notation.

In this first game, Black moves first:

1.e5 e4 2.Bc5 Bc4 3.Nf6 Nc3 4.0-0 [Note: this is the early Italian form of castling, where the player has choices of where his King and Rook will go – in this case, the King goes to g8 and the Rook to e8.] Nf3 5.c6 Ng5 6.d5 exd5 7.Bxf2+


7...Kxf2 8.Ng4+ Kg1 9.Qxg5 d3 10.Qh4 Qe2

Wrote Sarratt "There is no advantage on either side, says SALVIO. It appears to me to be slightly in favor of the Black."

In the second game, and all subsequent games presented here, White moves first; and the pattern of play is familiar:

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.0-0 [King to g1, Rook to e1] Nf6 5.c3 Ng4 6.d4 exd4 7.cxd4

Salvio's note:

White at the seventh move, instead of taking K.P. with Q. B. P. [7.cxd4], may take K. B. P. with his K.B., giving check [7.Bxf7+];

and if Black take that Bishop [7...Kxf7], White ought to check with his K. Kt. on the adversary's K. Kt. fourth square [8.Ng5+], and afterwards take K. Kt. with his Queen [9.Qxg4]. If Black should decline taking K.B., and, instead of it, should move his K. to his B. square [7...Kf8], White must move his Q. B. to adversary's K. Kt. fourth square [8.Bg5].

In the third game the Bishop sacrifice comes earlier:

1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Qe2 Nf6 4.Bxf7+


4...Kxf7 5.Qc4+ d5 6.Qxc5 Nxe4 7.Qe3 Nf6

"The Black has a very good game" notes Salvio.


The fourth game is similar:

1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Qe2 Nc6 4.Bxf7+



4...Kxf7 5.Qc4+ Ke8 Qxc5 "and wins a Pawn."

The last game:

1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.c3 c6

"This is a highly exceptionable move;" wrote Sarratt, "instead of it the Queen ought to be moved to her K. second square. [3...Qe7]"

4.Qe2

Then another note by Sarratt "Salvio has not directed the White to avail himself of his adversary's error: White may play much better, ex. gr. 4.d4 exd4 5.Bxf7+



5...Kxf7 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxc5

and white has a much better game."

It is clear that Salvio – and Sarratt – liked to sacrifice a Bishop at f7/f2. Perhaps that is what the Chess.com posters or Golombek had in mind when they linked Salvio with the Jerome Gambit.

However, nowhere in Salvio's Trattato does a Bishop sacrifice at f7/f2 occur after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5.

I guess I'd better search for more Golombek books!

The Salvio Gambit??

I was visiting Chess.com the other day, and noticed in the Forum section that one poster had mentioned the Salvio Gambit: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+.

Another poster had chimed in:

The "Salvio Gambit" is more commonly known as the Jerome Gambit, is most likely better than the Chicago [1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nxe5 Nxe5] and the Halloween or Leipzig Gambit (In the 4 Knights) [1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.Nxe5 Nxe5]. White only ends up losing 1 pawn, and Black's king is very uncomfortable, and Black can get blown off the board if he fails to proceed in an accurate manner.

Of course, I was flabbergasted.

Didn't Salvio live two centuries before Alonzo Wheeler Jerome? This was like finding paintings of the Jerome Gambit on a cave wall!

I sent an inquiry to both posters, and soon received a response from one of them who had seen the 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ line with the name "Salvio Gambit" in an old book by Golombek. He didn't mention the title.

Unfortunately – for my research – according to Harry Golombek's obituary in The New York Times, he wrote 38 books.

The poster also noted "In this case, the Jerome Gambit, is completely unsound, and only can work against weak players" – which I found reassuring.

I slipped off to the library where I also discovered Golombek's Encyclopedia of Chess (1977) which had this entry

Salvio, Alessandro (1570 – 1640) The dates of Salvio's birth and death are approximate. It is known that he was in his middle twenties when he defeated Paolo Boi who was by then already an old man. He and the Calabrian, Greco, were the chief theorists and writers on chess in Italy in the early seventeenth century. In this they differed markedly from their predecessors, Leonardo and Boi, who were practicing players but committed nothing to paper.

Salvio wrote three work: a treatise on the game, Trattato dell'inventione et arte liberale del gioco degli scacchi, published in Naples in 1604 and dedicated to his patron, Fulvio di Costanzo, Marquis of Corleto; a curious trajedy in verse on chess La Scaccaide, 1612; and in 1634 a life of Leonardo, Il Puttino, altramente detto il cavaliere errante, to which he attached his Trattoto.

Salvio made Naples the Italian centre for chess and he also created a "chess academy" that used to meet regulalrly in the house of another chess enthusiast, Judge Rovito.

As a player he was noted for his resource and brilliancy. As a writer he was largely responsible for the popularity of some variations of the King's Gambit, one of which was to be known later as the Muzio and another that bore his name, the Salvio Gambit (1.P-K4, P-K4; 2.P-KB4, PxP; 3.N-KB3, P-KN4; 4.B-B4, P-N5; 5.N-K5). these lines he owed to his predecessors but it was his analyses and his writing that popularized them.

Feeling lucky, I went to Google Books and did a search on "Salvio", only to discover a massive title:

The Works of Damiano, Ruy-Lopez and Salvio, on the Game of Chess;Translated and Arranged: with Remarks, Observations and Copious Notes on the Games. Containing, also, Several Original Games and Situations, by the Editor, To Which Are Added The Elements of the Art of Playing without seeing the Board. By J. H. Sarratt, 1813

Fantastic!

I quickly found the section I was looking for:

AN OPENING, Denominated by SALVIO, and by all Italian Players, Giuoco Piano; that Name being given to all Openings in which no Pawn is sacrificed for the sake of an attacking position, and in which the K. Kt. and the K. B. are played immediately after the K. Pawn.

Now we were getting somewhere!

Jerome Gambit Tournament: Chapter VIII

Pete Banks ("blackburne") is a chessfriend, and we are both Jerome Gambit enthusiasts, but in our ChessWorld tournament game, I had to finish off both him and the Gambit.

blackburne - perrypawnpusher
JG3 thematic, www.chessworld.net, 2008

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 Qe7


Whistler's defense, perhaps Black's best in the Jerome Gambit, as touched upon in "Flaws (Part II)" and "Beware: Mad Dog!"

Taking the Rook now is fatal.

8.Qxh8 Qxe4+ 9.Kd1 Qxg2 10.Qxh7+ Kf8 11.Re1 d5 12.d4


White needed to move his c-pawn to make an escape hatch for his King, and to meet that goal 12.c4 was a bit better than 12.c3, in that his Knight could subsequently get to c3. Even so, when the smoke cleared Black would be up a piece with the initiative and the safer King.

With the text comes checkmate.

12...Bg4+ 13.Kd2 Qxf2+ 14.Re2 Qxe2+

This is fine, although purists will point out that I missed a quicker mate: 14...Bb4+ 15.Nc3 Qxe2#

15.Kc3 Qc4+ 16.Kd2 Qxd4+ 17.Ke1 Qd1 checkmate

I felt fortunate that the rest of my games in this tournament were far enough along that none of my opponents observed this game and played Whistler's defense against me. In fact, I was quite surprised that no one else played the defense at all!

Pass the aspirin, please!

NN - Brunhold
Kempten, 1988
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qg3 Qf6 9.0–0 Be6 10.c3 h5 11.d4 h4 12.Qd3 Bb6 13.Be3 h3 14.g3 Qf3 0–1

psittacosis - Gandalf
HCL B652 www.playchess.de, 2001
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.d4 exd4 6.Ng5+ Kf8 7.Qf3+ Nf6 8.0–0 d5 9.exd5 Qxd5 10.Nd2 Qxg5 11.Nc4 Qd5 12.Qxd5 Nxd5 0–1

cnselway - boycey
net-chess.com, 2001
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nc6 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.d3 d5 6.c3 dxe4 7.Nxe5+ Nxe5 8.Bg5 Nxd3+ 9.Kf1 Qd5 10.Bf4 Qc5 11.h3 Qxf2# 0–1

gjr - gstevenson
net-chess.com, 2001
1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Bxf7+ Kxf7 4.Qh5+ g6 5.Qxe5 Na6 6.Qf4+ Qf6 7.Qg4 Qxf2+ 8.Kd1 Qf1# Checkmate 0–1

The Toffeeman - quag
www.ChessWorld.net , 2003
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.0–0 d6 6.d3 Nf6 7.Ng5+ Ke7 8.Nc3 Bg4 9.Qd2 Nd4 10.f3 Nxf3+ 0–1

kskcolle - mandoze
www.GameKnot.com, 2004
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Kg8 6.Qh5 Qe7 7.0–0 g6 8.Nxg6 hxg6 9.Qxg6+ Bg7 10.d3 Nc5 11.Bg5 Qe6 0–1

grobnic - obviously
www.GameKnot.com, 2004
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 Qe7 8.Qxh8 Qxe4+ 9.Kf1 Nf6 10.Nc3 Qxc2 11.h4 b6 12.Qd8 Ba6+ 0–1

steelydan - raes
www.GameKnot.com, 2004
1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 7.Qxc5 d6 8.Qd5+ Be6 9.Qxb7 Nf6 10.d3 Re8 11.f4 Bd5 12.Qb4 Bxe4 13.dxe4 Rxe4+ 0–1

Nestor250168 - Ratscales
www.chessworld.net, 2007
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 Nf6 8.Qxc5 Re8 9.Qd4 Rxe4+ 0–1

ale_xim - pascaline007
www.GameKnot.com, 2007
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Kf8 7.Qxe5 Qe7 8.Qf5+ Nf6 9.d3 d5 10.Qf3 dxe4 11.dxe4 Bg4 12.Qd3 Rd8 13.Qc4 0–1

graphic by Jeff Bucchino, "The Wizard of Draws"

Don't encourage them!

guest127 - guest494

Internet Chess Club, 2002

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qxh8 Qg5 9.Qxh7+ Kf8 10.0–0 Nf6 11.Qh8+ Kf7 12.d4 Qg4 13.dxc5 Be6 1–0

Rodriguez,P - Lauciello,R

chess.at-krays.com, 2003

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Nc3 Nf6 8.Qf5+ Kd6 9.d4 Kc6 10.Qxe5 d6 11.d5+ Kb6 12.Qg3 Bxf2+ 13.Qxf2+ c5 14.dxc6+ Kxc6 15.Bg5 1–0

guest226 - guest5633

Internet Chess Club, 2004

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 Bxf2+ 8.Kxf2 Qf6+ 9.Qxf6+ Kxf6 10.Rf1 Ne7 11.d4 Nc6 12.Kg1+ Kg7 13.Bg5 Rf8 14.Bh6+ 1–0

HPotter - breaker

www.ChessWorld.net, 2004

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.0–0 Nf6 6.d3 d5 7.exd5 Qxd5 8.Nc3 Qe6 9.Ng5+ 1–0

flatchio - kai_sim

www.GameKnot.com, 2004

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 Qf6 9.fxe5+ Qxe5 10.Qxe5+ Kc6 11.d4 1–0

kai_sim - flatchio

www.GameKnot.com, 2004

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 Qe7 8.Qxh8 Nf6 9.d3 d5 10.Nc3 dxe4 11.Nxe4 Nxe4 1–0

dmyze - levigun

www.GameKnot.com, 2004

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 Qf6 8.Nc3 Nd3+ 9.cxd3 Bb6 10.Nd5 Qg6 1–0

steelydan - flatchio

www.GameKnot.com, 2004

1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 Qe7 8.Qxh8 Nf6 9.d3 d5 10.Bh6 Nh5 11.Qxh7+ 1–0

Sir Osis of the Liver - drewbear

JG3 thematic www.chessworld.net, 2008

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nc3 Nf6 6.Ng5+ Kg8 7.Qe2 Nd4 8.Qc4+ d5 9.exd5 Qd6 10.Nce4 Qxd5 11.Nxf6+ 1–0

Jerome Gambit Tournament: Chapter VII

Ok, here we go again.

Playing the White side of the Jerome Gambit.

So far I have a disastrous loss thanks to introducing a "Theoretical Lemon" and a fortunate win when my opponent overplayed a drawn position – both games from the same home analysis.

Then there's that 9-move win on time.

Stand back, everyone!
perrypawnpusher - Gary_Seven
JG3 thematic www.chessworld.net, 2008

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 7.Qd5+ Ke8 8.Qxc5 c6 TN



Much more often played is 8...d6, bumping the White Queen back to e3.

9.Nc3 N8e7 10.0-0 d6 11.Qh5 Qc7


Things are already getting screwy for Black – Rybka recommends instead 11...Qb6 12.d3 Ng8 13.Qg5 Nf6 followed by 14.Qg3 Qc7 and castling-by-hand 15.Be3 Kf7 16.f4 Re8 17.Rae1 Kg8 after which the second player has an edge.

12.f4 Qb6+ 13.Kh1 Kd8 14.d4 Qxd4 15.Rd1 Qf2 16.f5

16...Nf4

Now might have been a good time, instead, to return the piece for two pawns, and an even game, with 16...Bxf5.

17.Rxd6+

I thought this was a pretty good move, as did my opponent, apparently. Later, my computer called it "a weak move, throwing away the advantage."

17...Bd7

This was, according to the computer "a weak move, ruining a winning position" preferring 17...Kc7. Don't you just hate Know-It-Alls?

With the balance of power tipped however, Black's game rolls quickly downhill.
18.Bxf4 Qxf4 19.Rad1 Kc7 20.Rxd7+ Kb6 21.Rxe7 Qf2 22.Qe2 Qxe2 23.Nxe2 Rhg8 24.Rdd7 Rab8 25.Rxg7 Rge8 26.Rge7 Rg8 27.Rxh7 Rge8 28.Rhe7 Rxe7 29.Rxe7 Rd8 30.f6 Rd1+ 31.Ng1 Rd2 32.f7 Rxc2 33.f8Q Rxb2 34.Rxb7+ Kxb7 35.Qg7+ 1-0

Clip art © by Tony Martin