Obscure and Disreputable Enough?

Although this blog is mostly about the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) it sometimes wanders a bit further afield.

For example, a while back, in the post "London Calling...Seven Months of Blog", I mused

I also got wondering the other day: is there another totally obscure and disreputable tactical opening line or gambit that I could go digging for information about, while I'm researching the Jerome Gambit??

This exercise led to a whole slew of new posts and opening ideas: "The next best thing...", "The next worse thing...", "Worth a Second Look (Part 1)", "Worth a Second Look (Part 2)", "Worth a Second Look (Part 3)", "Wild!", "Wilder!", "Wildest!", "And Yet Wilder Still...", "More of The Next Best Thing..." and "Busch-Gass Gambit".

I was reading Bob Long's new Chess DVD catalog the other day, and noticed that Volume 2 of his "The Busy Man's Chess Openings" series by IM Andrew Martin is coming out. Sub-titled "Black Shockers" it focuses on winning from the Black side, and includes analysis of the following defense: 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c5.

The line is as old as Greco, and seen today about as often as the Yeti, but in the past it was tried by Marshall, Schlechter, Rubinstein, Grunfeld, Euwe and Heidenfeld. O'Kelley de Galway, Bisguier and Westerinen played it a number of times. There's even an online Opening Report on it.

Might be worth checking out, at that.

A Side Line to Watch

When my opponent unleashed his 7th move in our Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) game, the only surprise came later, when I realized that it was the first time the move had been played against me.

It's a side line that all who play the Jerome should be ready for.


perrypawnpusher - ScudRocket
blitz 2 11, FICS, 2009
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 Bxf2+

National Master Brian Wall discussed this kind of move, when made by a lower-rated player, in one of his games. I figured my opponent (my strength) was thinking

Only a patzer would try an attack like this! I can disrupt his crazy attack, swap Queens, and then easily wallop someone I could probably give a knight to, not just a pawn...

8.Kxf2 Qf6+

Alternately: 8...Qh4+ 9.g3 Qh6 10.Qxh8 Qg5 11.Qxh7+ Ke6 12.Qxg8+ Ke5 13.d4+ Kxe4 14.Re1+ Qe3+ 15.Rxe3+ Kxd4 16.c3+ Kc5 17.Qxg6 d6 18.Qe8 a5 19.b4+ axb4 20.cxb4+ Kxb4 21.Re4+ Kc5 22.Be3+ Kd5 23.Nc3# checkmate, annicks - Ribosome, Dos Hermanas Internet, 2002;
8...Nf6 9.d3 (9.Qf4 g5 10.Qf3 g4 11.Qf4 d5 12.e5 Rf8 13.exf6 Kg6 14.Ke1 Qxf6 15.Qxf6+ Rxf6 16.d3 Bd7 17.Nc3 Re8+ 18.Kd1 d4 19.Ne4 Rf5 20.h3 gxh3 21.Rxh3 Rf1+ 22.Ke2 Bxh3 23.Kxf1 Bf5 24.Ng5 c5 25.b3 Black resigned, instantcrow - KingEfraim, ChessWorld.net 2005) 9...Re8 10.Qf4 d6 11.Rf1 Kg7 12.Qh6+ Kg8 13.h3 Bd7 14.Bg5 Re5 15.Kg1 Ng4 16.Bxd8 Nxh6 17.Bxc7 Rc8 18.Bxd6 Rg5 19.Bf4 Rgc5 20.Bxh6 Rxc2 21.Nc3 Black resigned, guest232 - BoardChairman, Internet Chess Club 2002

9.Qxf6+ Nxf6 10.d3
Or: 10.Nc3 b6 11.d3 d6 12.Rf1 Rf8 13.Kg1 Kg7 14.Bg5 Nd7 15.Nd5 Rxf1+ 16.Rxf1 c6 17.Nc7 Rb8 18.Ne6+ Kg8 19.Bh6 Ba6 20.Kf2 Nc5 21.Nxc5 bxc5 22.Ke3 Re8 23.b3 d5 24.Rf4 Bc8 25.Kd2 dxe4 26.Rxe4 Rxe4 27.dxe4 Kf7 28.h3 Kf6 29.Ke3 g5 30.g4 Kg6 31.Bf8 h5 32.Bxc5 a6 Black resigned, blackburne - Bullit52, Chessworld.net 2007.

White is up a solid pawn – and remember, a few moves ago, he was down two pieces.

10...d6

10...d5 11.exd5 Nxd5 12.Rf1 Ke8 13.Bh6 Nf6 14.Bg7 Ng4+ 15.Kg1 Rg8 16.Re1+ Kf7 17.Bd4 Rd8 18.Rf1+ Bf5 19.h3 Rxd4 20.hxg4 Rxg4 21.Nc3 c6 22.Rae1 b5 23.Ne4 Kg7 24.Nd6 Rg5 25.Nxf5+ gxf5 26.Re6 Rg6 27.Re5 Rf8 28.Re7+ Kh8 29.Rxa7 f4 30.Rf3 h5 31.Re7 Rfg8 32.Re2 Rg4 33.Kh2 R8g5 34.c4 Kg7 35.b3 Kf6 36.Re4 Rxg2+ 37.Kh3 R2g3+ 38.Rxg3 Rxg3+ 39.Kh2 Rxd3 40.Rxf4+ Kg5 41.Rf2 Kg4 42.Rg2+ Kf4 43.cxb5 cxb5 44.Kg1 b4 45.Rf2+ Rf3 46.Kg2 Rxf2+ 47.Kxf2 Ke4 48.Ke2 Kd4 49.Kd2 h4 50.Ke2 Kc3 White resigned, mediax - Carlos Azcarate, ChessWorld.net, 2008

11.Rf1 Kg7 12.Bg5

This is still known territory: 12.Kg1 Bd7 13.Nc3 c6 (13...Rhf8 14.h3 (14.Bg5 Nh5 15.Nd5 Rac8 16.Rxf8 Kxf8 17.Rf1+ Kg7 18.Bf6+ Nxf6 19.Nxf6 Bc6 20.Ng4 h5 21.Ne3 Re8 22.Rf4 d5 23.Nxd5 Black resigned, blackburne03 - bobby-pisher, Internet Chess Club, 2003) 14...Nh5 15.Be3 a6 16.Nd5 c6 17.Nb6 Rxf1+ 18.Rxf1 Rd8 19.Bg5 Black resigned, Moller - Pedersen, www.eskak.dk 2008) 14.Bh6+ Kxh6 15.Rxf6 Rhf8 16.Raf1 Rxf6 17.Rxf6 d5 18.Rd6 Black forfeited, guest1824 - guest1255, Internet Chess Club, 2002

12...Ng4+ 13.Kg1 Be6

Both Kings have castled-by-hand, and Black is slightly ahead in development – but not a pawn's worth. Maybe he planned to out-play me here, but it didn't work out that way.

14.h3 Nf6



A mistake: 14...h6 was necessary.
15.Bxf6+ Kh6 16.Bxh8 Rxh8

A Rook is a Rook.

17.Nc3 Rg8 18.Rf6 Bd7 19.Rf7 Rd8 20.Raf1 g5 21.R1f6+ Kh5 22.g4+
I had mate worked out, but 22.Rxh7# was faster.
22...Kh4 23.Rxh7+ Kg3 24.Ne2 checkmate

Opening Report

Wandering the Internet, looking for something new on the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+), I came across the "Scacchi: Enciclopedia pratica dei Gambetti" website which contained an Opening Report on the Jerome. It contained a wealth of information, including:

1. Statistics and History
1.1 Statistics Games
1.2 Oldest games
1.3 Newest games
1.4 Current popularity
1.5 Most frequent players (White)
1.6 Most frequent players (Black)
2. Ratings and Performance
2.1 Average ratings and performance
2.2 Games with highest average rating
3. Result Trends
3.1 Result lengths and frequencies
3.2 Shortest wins (White)
3.3 Shortest wins (Black)
4. Moves and Themes
4.1 Move orders reaching the report position
4.2 Moves from the report position
4.3 Positional Themes
4.4 EndgamesMaterial at the end of each game:
5. Theory Table

It was produced by using the free SCID database, which in this case contained 4,011,859 games, and showed the Jerome Gambit scoring almost 67%!

Admittedly the Jerome's "Frequency in all years" of the database was "once every 1,337,286 games."

That works out to statistics based on – how many Jerome Gambit games??

Oh, never mind...

Burnt Jerome Attack

As opposed to Fried, of course...

As I wrote in "Fried Jerome Attack":

Not everyone is interested in facing the Jerome Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ (see, for example "It's a good thing I read this blog"). One way to avoid it is to play Philidor's Defense, 2...d6, instead of allowing the Italian Game with 2...Nc6. Still, one shouldn't provoke too much of an attacking spirit in the heart of the Jerome Gambiteer...

This miniature game updates and corrects a note that I gave to perrypawnpusher - azzaonnet, blitz, FICS 2009.


perrypawnpusher - LWAKE
blitz 13 0, FICS, 2009

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bc4 Nf6

4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5

A risky move against a Jerome Gambiteer.

6.Nxf7 Kxf7 7.Qf3+ Ke8

Black's King must venture into danger to hold onto the piece: 7...Ke8 8.Qxd5 Qxd5 9.Bxd5, as in perrypawnpusher - xPOGOx, FICS 2009, simply leads to a Queenless middlegame a pawn down – from "Fried Jerome Attack"

8.Bxd5


Simple – and stronger than 8.Qxd5.

8...Qf6 9.Bxb7 Bxb7 10.Qxb7 Bc5



11.0-0 Kf7 12.Qxa8 Rf8 13.Qd5+ Black resigned


graphic by Jeff Bucchino, "The Wizard of Draws"

My Turn to Blunder

When playing the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) I like to have a regular routine: I play the gambit, my opponent is surprised or shocked and plays a series of second-best moves, I gain the advantage – and then I either beat my opponent, or benefit from a timely error on his part.

You'll see most of that in the following game – except the part after "I gain the advantage", where I'm the one who comes up with the blunder. How awkward! 

perrypawnpusher - thehunterrjames blitz 10 0, FICS, 2009 

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+

Here we go! 4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6

A safe and solid defense. 7.Qd5+ Ke8 8.Qxc5 d6 9.Qe3 Nf6

10.0-0 Kf7 11.f4

A bit better than 11.Nc3 c6 12.f4 Rf8 13.f5 Ne5 14.d4 Nc4 15.Qd3 Nb6 16.Bg5 Kg8 17.g4 Nbd7 18.Rae1 Qb6 19.Na4 Qb4 20.b3 Nxg4 21.Bd2 Qa3 22.Bc3 b5 23.Bb2 Qb4 24.Bc3 Qa3 25.Bb2 Qb4 26.Bc3 Qa3 27.Bb2 draw perrypawnpusher - joejox, blitz, FICS, 2009 11...Re8 12.d3 I thought the right move was to advance the f-pawn, but I couldn't remember (or figure out) why Black couldn't respond with 12...Rxe4. (Answer: White captures the Knight with check, then moves his Queen.) Better was 12.f5 Ne5 13.Nc3 (13.d4 Neg4 14.Qb3+ Kf8 15.h3 Rxe4 16.hxg4 Rxg4 17.Qf3 c6 18.Nc3 d5 19.Bf4 Kg8 20.Be5 h5 21.Rae1 Bd7 22.Re3 Qb6 23.b3 Rf8 24.Na4 Qb4 25.Nc5 Bc8 26.c3 Qb6 27.Bxf6 gxf6 28.Qh3 Rg5 29.Ne6 Bxe6 30.fxe6 Qc7 31.e7 Re8 32.Qe6+ Kh8 33.Qxf6+ Rg7 34.Qf8+ Black resigned Vazquez - Carrington, Mexico, 2nd match, 1876) 13...Nc4 14.Qd4 Ne5 15.d3 Kg8 16.Bg5 h6 17.Bxf6 gxf6 18.Qd5+ Be6 19.fxe6 c6 20.e7+ Kg7 21.exd8Q Raxd8 22.Qd4 c5 23.Qf2 Black resigned perrypawnpusher - DysonLin, blitz, FICS, 2009 12...c5 Two alternatives: 12...Kg8 13.Nd2 Ng4 14.Qe2 Qh4 15.Nf3 Qh5 16.h3 Nf6 17.Bd2 Bxh3 18.gxh3 Qxh3 19.Rf2 Ng4 20.Rg2 h5 21.Ng5 Qh4 22.Rf1 Nxf4 23.Bxf4 Rf8 24.Ne6 Rf7 25.Bg5 Rxf1+ 26.Kxf1 Qh1+ 27.Rg1 Qh3+ 28.Ke1 Nh2 29.Qg2 Nf3+ 30.Kd1 Nxg1 31.Qxg1 Qxe6 32.Kd2 Rf8 33.Be3 Qg4 34.Qe1 h4 35.Kc3 h3 36.Kb3 Qg2 37.Qc3 h2 38.Qxc7 h1Q 39.Qxd6 Qh5 40.Qe6+ Kh8 White resigned guest435 - guest1150, Internet Chess Club, 2002; 12...Ng4 13.Qe2 Qh4 14.h3 Nf6 15.Qf3 Kg8 16.Nc3 Nh5 17.Nd5 Rf8 18.g4 Ne5 19.Qg2 c6 20.Ne7+ Qxe7 21.gxh5 Qh4 22.fxe5 Bxh3 23.Rxf8+ Rxf8 24.Bg5 Qxh5 25.Qg3 Rf3 26.Qh4 Qxh4 27.Bxh4 dxe5 28.Kh2 Be6 29.Bg3 h5 30.Kg2 Rf6 31.Bxe5 Rg6+ 32.Kh2 Rg5 33.Bc3 Bg4 34.Rg1 Kf7 35.Rf1+ Ke6 36.Rf8 Bd1 37.Rf2 g6 38.Rd2 Bg4 39.Rg2 b5 40.Kg1 c5 41.Bd2 Re5 42.Bf4 Bf3 43.Rf2 Black resigned guest2660 - guest2731, Internet Chess Club, 2004 13.Nc3 Ng4 14.Qg3 h5 A strange echo of my second game against TJPOT. 15.f5 N6e5 16.h3 Nf6 17.Bf4 This is the wrong idea: the Bishop should pin at g5 and then the Knight should go to d5. 17...b5 18.Bxe5 I should have admitted my mistake and played 18.Bg5. (I almost did.) 18...Rxe5 19.Qg6+ 19...Kf8 20.g4 hxg4 21.hxg4 Nxg4

Okay, Black obliges me by giving back a piece, and I will have the advantage. 22.Qxg4 Qf6 23.Nd5 Qh6 24.f6 Simply losing the Queen. Unbelieveable. No excuse.

Was it too hard to find 24.Rf3? 24...Bxg4 25.fxg7+ Rybka 3 later said this led to a mate in 19. I'd had enough and resigned here.

de.wikibooks

When slightly-interested people write about the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) they are usually content to present the historic game Amateur - Blackburne, London, 1885 – usually with light, often outdated, notes.

I recently saw coverage in a German language wikibook that presented the game with a little bit more attention.

3. Miniatur
Gespielt in London 1880.
4.Lc4xf7+? (Dies ist das Jerome-Gambit, das durch 7. ... Dd8-e7 8. De5xh8 De7xe4+ 9. Ke1-d1 De4xg2 10. Dh8xh7+ Kf7-f8 11. Th1-e1 d5 12. Te1-e8+ Kf8xe8 13. Dh7xg8+ Lc5-f8 widerlegt wird) Ke8xf7 5.Sf3xe5+ Sc6xe5 6.Dd1-h5+ g7-g6 7.Dh5xe5 d7-d6 Dieser letzte schwarze Zug eröffnet eine Falle. 8.De5xh8 Dd8-h4 9.0-0 Sg8-f6 Und die Falle hat zugeschnappt. 10.c2-c3? (10. Da8-d8 hält das Gleichgewicht) Sf6-g4 11.h2-h3 Lc5xf2+ 12.Kg1-h1 Lc8-f5!
13.Dh8xa8 Dh4xh3+! 14.g2xh3 Lf5xe4#

The author not only points out White's better alternative, 10.Qd8, he indicates that the game is then in balance – most sources unaware of the analysis of Chandler and Dimitrov say that White has the advantage.

Also, it is heartening to see Whistler's Defense, 7. ... Dd8-e7, given as the refutation to the Jerome Gambit. The wikibook author sees Blackburne's 7...d6 as setting a trap – which snaps shut on White after 9...Nf6.

Jerome - A/Z

It's always fun to find a new Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) game, especially one played by its originator, Alonozo Wheeler Jerome.

The other day I thought I had made a discovery, but it turned out that Jerome's game vs Mr. Z was already in my database, as a game vs Mr. A(mateur).

Jerome - Zimmerman, correspondence, 1880
St. Louis Daily Globe-Democrat, April 18, 1880: We are indebted to Mr. A. W. Jerome for the subjoined game, played by letter with Mr. J. K. Zimmerman.

Pittsburgh Telegraph, February 2, 1881: The following game played betwen the author of the "Jerome Gambit" and another amateur.

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+

Pittsburgh Telegraph: This move constitutes the gambit, and although unsound, as shown by Mr. Charles's analysis in this column, yet leads to some interesting and critical positions.

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 d6

This is a line popular with computers, and is the refutation International Master Gary Lane suggests in his The Greatest Ever Chess Tricks and Traps.

It figured in six of Jerome's games against S. A. Charles in their unfinished 1881 correspondence match.

It was first seen in D'Aumiller - A.P., 1878

8.f5+

Rejecting the offer of a piece. 8...Qh3+ was seen in one of the Jerome - Charles, correspondence 1881 games.
8...Ke7
The alternative 8...Kd7 was seen in one of the Jerome - Charles games.

9.Nc3 Nf6 10.Qh4 c6 11.d3 Qe8 12.Bg5 b5
St. Louis Daily Globe-Democrat: Black could now get his King into safe quarters by going to Q2, QB2, etc., but as Mr. Jerome justly remarks "While playing part of this game Mr. Zimmerman was chasing Utes and trying to keep warm with the mercury at 20 degrees below zero on the 'tented field' in Colorado; some allowances must therefore be made for failure to make the best moves." - Turf
13.0-0-0 h5
This move is hard to fathom. Either here or on the next move ...b4 seems best.

14.d4 Bxd4 15.Rxd4 c5 16.Bxf6+ gxf6 17.Nd5+
White is developing a bit of initiative, which Black should blunt with either 17...Nf7 or 17...Qf7, when it is unclear how White can reach an advantage.
17...Kf7 18.Qxf6+ Kg8 19.Ne7+ Kh7 20.Rxd6 Ng4 21.Qg5 Black resigns