Showing posts with label Collins. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Collins. Show all posts

Thursday, July 13, 2017

Jerome Gambit: First There Is The Confusion Factor

I am reading IM Sam Collins' Gambit Busters* (Everyman Chess, 2010) with a know-your-enemy focus, and enjoyed the following, from the chapter "Escaping the Defensive Mindset"
It is well known that club players, typically, go to pieces when confronted by a gambit. Of course, for every player there are some gambit lines which they know, and perhaps their theoretical knowledge will suffice to get them to a safe position. But this won't be the case when they are confronted by an established gambit they don't know, an unusual or forgotten gambit, or where their opponent deviates from theory. 
To my mind, gambits are the situations where there is the single biggest gap between passively looking at a position at home, and facing something over the board. Skimming over an opening variation with a cup of tea, maybe Rybka muttering in the background, it all looks so straightforward - an "=" symbol (or something even more favourable), a bunch of crisp responses demonstrating the intellectual failure of our opponent's adventure. 
But at the board, things are rather different. First, there is the confusion factor...

Yes, indeed. At the level of play that the Jerome Gambit is exhibited, it is often "unusual" or "forgotten" enough to lead to success. Certainly it can lead to "confusion".

"Knowing" that the opening is refuted, looked askance at by "the book" and hooted at by computers, it must be infuriating (or embarassing) for the defender to be struggling against such a monstrosity.

I am remined of the story about chess great Aaron Nimzovich climbing on a table and bemoaning "Why must I lose to this idiot?" More recently, Bill Wall shared the scolding he received from his opponent after having the audacity to play - and win with - the Jerome Gambit. The opening is garbage, it would never work against a grandmaster, the world champion would never play such a thing...

Ah, yes. In my pre-Jerome Gambit days I would repeatedly defeat a friend who always protested "But I was winning!" I would reassure him that, yes, he was winning, right up to the point where I checkmated him.


(*I am enjoying Collins' work, and I appreciate the classic games that he chooses to illustrate his points. I was surprised, however, in the mentioned chapter, that after all that he wrote of the tribulations of "club players" he chose a game between super-Grandmasters Anand and Shirov to drive the point home.)

Thursday, November 26, 2009

Watch that last step...

I was logged onto FICS, waiting to challenge "metheny" to a game – a Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+), I hoped – when "AreWeThereYet" got to him first. I hung around and watched the first few moves – and then settled in to enjoy the whole game: a fun battle, with a lesson at the end.

AreWeThereYet  - metheny
blitz 10 0, FICS, 2009

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Na5


Ooooooh. He's asking for it. I was saying to myself: sac the Bishop, sac the Bishop, sac the Bishop...

4.Bxf7+

Yes! I decided to stick around and watch the game.

I have 85 games with this move in my database: 55 wins, 28 losses, 2 draws – scoring 66%. Not bad, but I thought it would be higher.

I've sprinkled in a few short games along with my notes.

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Ke8



Rybka and others have preferred 5...Ke7: 6.Nc3 (6.Qf3 Nf6 7.Qa3+ d6 8.Qxa5 dxe5 9.Qxe5+ Kf7 10.0-0 Bd6 11.Qc3 Re8 White resigned, M,T-Lothar, remoteschach.de, 2006) 6...Qe8 7.d4 Kd8 8.0-0 d6 9.Nf3 Qg6 10.Qd3 equal game ;

Also 5...Ke6 6.d4 d6 (6...Bd6 7.Qg4+ Ke7 8.Bg5+ Nf6 9.Bxf6+ gxf6 10.Qg7+ Ke8 11.Qf7 checkmate, tih - Shatranje, FICS, 2000) 7.Nd3 d5 8.exd5+ Kxd5 9.Qh5+ Kxd4 10.Be3+ Ke4 11.Nd2 checkmate Sims - Collins, Detroit, 1999;

Or 5...Kf6 6.d4 d6 (6...g5 7.Qf3+ Ke7 8.Bxg5+ Nf6 9.Qxf6+ Ke8 10.Qf7 checkmate, thefrench - bouffant, net-chess, 2002) 7.Qf3+ Bf5 8.Qxf5+ Ke7 9.Qf7 checkmate, Karlsson - Parkes, IECC 2001.

6.Qh5+

Not so successful was 6.c3 Qg5 7.Qf3 Qxe5 8.d4 White resigned, majorminor - chilepine, FICS, 2005.

6...Ke7

Again, Rybka and others preferred 6...g6:
a) 7.Nxg6 Qf6 8.Nxh8+ Black resigned, UNPREDICTABLE - Umbertino, FICS, 2009 ;
b) 7.Nxg6 Nf6 8.Qe5+ (8.Qxa5 b6 9.Qe5+ Be7 10.Nxh8 d6 11.Qg5 Nxe4 12.Qg8+ Bf8 13.Qf7 checkmate, jdgalba - lukkaz,FICS, 2008) 8...Qe7 9.Nxe7 Black resigned, fmarius - drwinstonoboogie, FICS 2009;
c) 7.Nxg6 hxg6 8.Qxg6+ Ke7 9.d4 Bh6 10.Bg5+ Bxg5 11.Qxg5+ Ke8 12.Qxa5 Qe7 13.Nc3 b6 14.Qe5 Qxe5 15.dxe5 Bb7 16.0-0-0 Nh6 slight advantage to White 

7.Qf7+ Kd6 8.Qd5+



It is clear from this move that White has at least a draw, as he can repeat positions with continued checks. What if he wants more than a draw?

For starters, he can play as in the game, and pick up the wayward Black Knight at a5.

He can also play 8.d4, threatening to weave a mating net. Black's strongest response is 8...Qf6, but White's surprise shot 9.Nc4+ will allow a win of the Black Queen with 10.Bf4+. Something to remember the next time the line pops up!

8...Ke7 9.Qxa5

Of course, 9.Qf7+ Kd6 10.d4 transposes into the previous note.

It is not as good to jump into a typical Jerome Gambit endgame (Queenless middlegame): 9.Qf7+ Kd6 10.Qxg8 Rxg8 11.Nf7+ Ke7 12.Nxd8 Kxd8 13.d3 b6 14.0-0 Nc6 15.f4 Ba6 16.Nc3 Bc5+ 17.Be3 Bxe3+ 18.Kh1 Nd4 19.Rf3 Nxf3 White resigned, paaras - worpe, FICS, 2004

9...d6 10.Nf3 Bg4



White has a comfortable two-pawn-plus position, and develops his game.

11.d3 Nf6 12.Bg5 Bxf3 13.gxf3 c6 14.Qxd8+ Rxd8



15.Rg1 h6 16.Bxf6+ gxf6 17.Nc3 b5



The endgame may take a while, but the game should be White's. He can infiltrate along the g-file, use f5 as a post for his Knight, and even look to open up another file with a2-a4. 

18.Kd2 a6 19.Ne2 h5 20.Nf4



Working against Black's possible ...d6-d5. I prefer Ne2-d4-f5.

20...Bh6 21.Ke3 Rhg8 22.Rg3 Rxg3



This seems a bit too cooperative, as it allows White to straighten out his pawns. Probably 22...d5 was best, now that the White Knight was pinned. 

23.fxg3 Rg8 24.b4 d5 25.exd5 cxd5



White's play has left his opponent with 4 pawn islands, to his own two. He might now have considered 26.a4 to open a line for his Rook.

26.Kd4 Kd6



If sacrificing a Bishop on move 4 always led to engames like this, we might see masters playing the Jerome Gambit...

27.Nxd5

Surprisingly, a weak move, as Black's next move reveals. In fact, it is hard to say if the move loses the game, or merely leaves White with a difficult draw to find. Amazing!

It looks like 27.Nxh5 was the correct move.

27...f5



The threat of an x-ray attack along the a1-h8 diagonal will win the White Knight: 28.Re1 Bg7+ 29.Ke3 Re8+ 30.Kd2 Rxe1 31.Kxe1 Kxd5, when White has three pawns against Black's Bishop. Fritz8 says Black wins, but not every club player plays like a computer, especially in blitz.

28.Ne3 Bg7 checkmate




Wow. An excting game: interesting opening play, a business-like middle, and a surprising resource that turns the table in the end.

My thanks to both metheny and AreWeThereYet.

Thursday, December 18, 2008

Queened! and Rooked!

Geoff Chandler, of Chandler Cornered (see "Mars Attacks!"), has produced Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) analysis (see "Flaws (Part II)") and games (see "Stuff happens...") – not to mention regular, hysterical and education posts at his own site.

I clearly should have included him in the Jerome Gambit Gemeinde (see "Jerome Gambit Gemeinde (modern)").
Recently
Geoff wrote of a challenge he made at the RedHotPawn site for someone to compose a game where all 16 pawns promote to Queens. "Swiss Gambit" of the site sent him a creation by Ed Collins.




Just play it over...

1.e4 f5 2.e5 Nf6 3.exf6 e5 4.g4 e4 5.Ne2 e3 6.Ng3 e2 7.h4 f4 8.h5 fxg3 9.h6 g5 10.Rh4 gxh4 11.g5 g2 12.g6 Bg7 13.hxg7 g1Q 14.f4 h3 15.f5 h2 16.b4 a5 17.b5 a4 18.b6 a3 19.Bb2 Ra7 20.bxa7 axb2 21.a4 b5 22.a5 b4 23.a6 b3 24.c4 h1Q 25.c5 h5 26.c6 Bb7 27.cxb7 c5 28.d4 c4 29.d5 Nc6 30.dxc6 c3 31.c7 c2 32.c8Q c1Q 33.b8Q Qcc7 34.a8Q d5 35.a7 d4 36.Nc3 dxc3 37.Qa6 c2 38.Qa8b7 c1Q 39.a8Q Qhd5 40.gxh8Q+ Kd7 41.g7 bxa1Q 42.g8Q b2 43.f7 b1Q 44.f8Q h4 45.f6 h3 46.f7 h2 47.Qfa3 h1Q 48.f8Q exf1Q+

He then put out a challenge for a composed game with 20 Rooks in it – and soon received this from "Dood in the Mood"...


1.d4 d5 2.e4 e5 3.f4 a5 4.f5 h5 5.Bf4 exf4 6.c4 b5 7.c5 b4 8.Bc4 dxc4 9.Nc3 bxc3 10.d5 g5 11.e5 g4 12.Nf3 gxf3 13.d6 c2 14.c6 c1R 15.f6 Rb1 16.e6 Bb7 17.cxb7 Na6 18.b8R Bg7 19.fxg7 f5 20.e7 Kf7 21.exd8R c3 22.Rdc8 c2 23.d7 c5 24.d8R c1R 25.a3 Nb4 26.axb4 c4 27.b5 c3 28.b6 c2 29.Kd2 f2 30.b7 f1R 31.b4 f3 32.g4 f2 33.g5 Nh6 34.h3 Ng4 35.hxg4 Rg1 36.g8R f1R 37.g6+ Ke6 38.Rc5 f4 39.Rbc8 f3 40.b8R f2 41.R8c7 Re1 42.b5 f1R 43.b6 a4 44.Ra2 a3 45.Rb2 a2 46.b7 a1R 47.Rbc8 h4 48.b8R h3 49.Rgf8 Rh7 50.Rh2 Rh8 51.Rhf2 h2 52.g7 h1R 53.g8R R8h7 54.g5 R7h6 55.g6 Rh7 56.g7 R7h6 57.Rh8 Rh7 58.g8R cxd1R

Amazing!