Jerome Gambit: Merely Commentators, or Players?

One of the reasons I started a discussion at the English Chess Forum searching out early English game examples of the Jerome Gambit was because of the quote by Joseph Henry Blackburne in Mr. Blackburne's Games at Chess (1899)

I used to call this the Kentucky Opening. For a while after its introduction it was greatly favored by certain players, but they soon grew tired of it.

The issue of the "Kentucky Opening" has been dealt with previously on this blog - see "The Kentucky Opening" parts 1, 2, 3, 4 and "The Kentucky / Danvers Opening".

That the Jerome Gambit had been "greatly favored by certain players" seems to suggest that games should be available - but none new to me have surfaced so far.

Blackburne may have been referring to coverage of the Jerome Gambit in some print sources.

For example, The Chess Player's Chronicle, August 1, 1877, translated and reprinted the early and in depth article on the Jerome Gambit, from "Chess Theory for Beginners" by Lieut. Sorensen, from the May 1877 issue of Nordisk Skaktidende. I believe that the translation was by Rev. C.E. Ranken.

Later, the third edition of Cook's Synopsis of Chess Openings A Tabuled Analysis by William Cook (1882) had Jerome Gambit analysis, including thanks to

Mr. Freeborough of Hull, and Rev. C.E. Ranken, of Malven, for material assistance in the compilation of the tables, original variations in the openings, and help in the examination of proof.

Versions of Chess Openings Ancient and Modern, starting with the first edition in 1889, include Jerome Gambit analysis and suggested moves by Freeborough and Rankin.

It should be noted, too, that George Hatfield Dingley Gossip covered the Jerome Gambit in his Theory of the Chess Openings (1879) and The Chess Player's Vade Mecum (1891). James Mortimer also had Jerome Gambit analysis in the many editions of his The Chess Player's Pocket-Book, starting in 1888.

Freeborough and Ranken, Gossip and Mortimer - merely commentators or players?

The Best Jerome Gambit Game of the Year (Part 2)

We continue from the previous post, considering a game that has lept to the top of the heap for Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) games this year.

As indicated, Readers are encouraged to dispute my assessment by sending in other great Jerome Gambit games...

Wall, Bill - Guest871838
PlayChess.com, 2014

8.Qxh8 

Of the offer of the Rook with 7...d6, Blackburne wrote in Mr. Blackburne's Games at Chess (1899), "Not to be outdone in generosity." The cost to White of taking the Rook is to have his Queen locked out of the action, at a time when Black's pieces begin to swarm the Kingside.

Blackburne's book also contained the following: "NOTE. I used to call this the Kentucky opening. For a while after its introduction it was greatly favoured by certain players, but they soon grew tired of it."

A resonable explanation of the reference to the "Kentucky opening" has appeared previously in this blog (see "A New Abrahams Jerome Gambit" for a summary). 

As for the "certain players" who "greatly favoured" the Jerome Gambit, it is difficult to identify them by games played, as I have discovered the games of only a dozen or so players (other than Jerome, himself) who played the opening between when it was introduced in 1874 and the publication of Blackburne's book in 1899. Andres Clemente Vazquez, of Mexico, has four games in The Database, while E.B. Lowe, of Great Britain, has three.

Blackburne might well have been referring to authors who included analysis of the Jerome Gambit in their opening books, in which case George H.D. Gossip, of Theory of the Chess Openings (1879) and The Chess Player's Vade Mecum (1891) ; William Cook, of Synopsis of Chess Openings (1882, 1888); E. Freeborough and C. E. Rankin of  Chess Openings Ancient and Modern (1889, 1893, 1896);and Mortimer of The Chess Player's Pocket book And Manual of the Openings (1888 - 1906); are all likely suspects. Certainly, more research is still needed.

8...Qh4

This is Blackburne's counter attack, threatening 9...Qxf2+ 10.Kd1 Bg4 mate.

9.O-O

Munoz and Munoz, in their notes to Amateur - Blackburne, London, 1885, in the Brooklyn Chess Chronicle, suggested "He should have attempted to free his pieces by P to Q4 [d4] before castling." 

The move 9.d4 received a good look in "Updating the Jerome Gambit (Part 1)", including references to L. Elliot Fletcher’s energetic Gambit’s Accepted (1954), an internet article on Amateur - Blackburne (not currently available) by Brazil's Hindemburg Melao, and some musings and analysis from Bruce Pandolfini, in his 1989 Chess Openings: Traps & Zaps !

9...Nf6

The door closes on White's Queen.

10.Qd8

Melao mentioned that Idel Becker, in his Manual de xadrez (1974), attributed the move 10.d4 to Euwe (source not mentioned). Melao was skeptical about the move, giving Black’s counter-attack 10…Bh3 11.gxh3 Rxh8 12.dxc4 Qxh3 13.f3 g5 14.Rf2 g4 15. Bf4 gxf3 16.Bg3 h5 17.Nd2 h4 18.Nf3 Qg4 with advantage for Black. He preferred 10.Qd8 - another suggestion (without further analysis) by Munoz and Munoz in the Brooklyn Chess Chronicle, August 1885, who opined "The only hope he had was 10.Q to Q8 [10.Qd8], thus preventing the deadly  move of Kt to Kt5 [...Ng4]."

Bill Wall mentioned that 10.d3 loses to 10...Bh3 11.Qxa8 Qg4 12.g3 Qf3 as was brutally demonstrated in RevvedUp - Hiarcs 8, 2 12 blitz, 2006 (0-1, 12).

10...Bd7

Most consistent for Black is 10...Bb6, covering the c7 pawn and enforcing the embargo on the Queen. White should return a pawn to free Her Majesty with 11.e5 dxe5 12.Qd3 as in Wall,Bill - Foo,Nathan, Palm Bay, FL, 2010 (1-0, 33). 

[to be continued]

Jerome Gambit: Early Opening Tomes (Part 2)

In 1891, reflecting the chess world's ambivalence about the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+), G.H.D. Gossip's Chess Player's Vade Mecum and Pocket Guide to the Openings Gossip had analysis of the Jerome, while his Theory of Chess Openings did not. The Handbuch was silent as well.

By 1900 a reader could still find references, but they might be delegated to instruction for novices. Chess Openings for Beginners, by Edward Ernest Cunnington, for example, exhausts itself with "Here we may mention, with a caution, as being quite unsound, the Jerome Gambit." The following year, Cunnington's The Modern Chess Primer mentions the first 6 moves of the named gambit.

In 1902, William Cook's (of Synopsis) The Chess Player's Compendium had no mention of the Jerome Gambit. For that matter, neither did his 1906 The Evolution of the Chess Openings.

Perhaps the 1904 The Complete Chess Guide, by G.H.D Gossip F.J. Lee, showed the Jerome Gambit's hanger-on status best. At the start of the book the authors proclaim

We have therefore eliminated obsolete openings and confined ourselves merely to a brief examination of a dozen of the leading debuts...; omitting those openings in which the defense is declared by the most competent theorists to be weak or inferior, as for example Philidor's and Petroff's Defenses to the Kings Knight's opening; the Sicilian; the Greco Counter Gambit; Center Counter Gambit; Fianchettoes, Blackwar [sic] and Jerome Gambit, etc.

HOWEVER, Part III of the book, "Guide to the Openings," contained Jerome Gambit analysis!

It was left up to the March 1906 edition of Lasker's Chess Magazine to pronounce
"Our Question Box"

Ichabodf: - No; the Jerome gambit is not named after St. Jerome. His penances, if he did any, were in atonement of rather minor transgressions compared with the gambit.

A Jerome Discovery (Afterword)

The chess columns from The Literary Digest (see Parts 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5) are an exciting discovery for Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) fans on several counts.

First, it gives analysis of an important defense for Black that is not very well known, but is very effective. See "Jerome Gambit Tournament: Chapter X" for both its first appearance (Sorensen - X, Denmark, 1888) and my use of it in Sir Osis of the Liver - perrypawnpusher, chessworld.net, 2008.

It also is the first "live" account of Alonzo Wheeler Jerome that I have run across, since the 1884 mention of him by the chess columnist of the Pittsburgh Chronicle-Telegraph (see "100 Posts - What more to say?").

That year must have been a difficult one for A.W. Jerome, as 1884 saw the publication of Cook's Synopsis of Chess Openings A Tabular Analysis by William Cook, With American Inventions in the Openings and Fresh Analysis since 1882, by J. W. Miller.

Cook's Synopsis of Chess Openings, 3rd Edition, (surely the English language MCO/ECO of its time) had been published in 1882 and sold out quickly. The newer edition from Miller contained analysis of the Jerome Gambit in both Cook's reprinted work and in the American "supplement" – without mention of Jerome, the man, and including the notation

We give the fullest analysis of this American invention that has yet been in print. The author is Mr. S. A. Charles, Cincinnati, O.

S. A. Charles, a member of the Cincinnati Chess Club (as was J. W. Miller), had written a series of analytical articles years earlier for the Cincinnati Commercial Gazette, Miller's newspaper, before going on to submit his work to the Pittsburgh Telegraph (later Chronicle-Telegraph).

In 1881, the Telegraph published Charles' "compilation" of what he could find of Jerome Gambit analysis, suplemented later by mostly incomplete correspondence games he had played with A. W. Jerome. This look at the Jerome Gambit was later that year picked up by Brentano's Chess Monthly, and the following year by Cook's Synopsis.

Although Charles mentioned Jerome when he wrote, by the time Cook got ahold of the analysis in 1882, Jerome's name, except for the Gambit's title, had been dropped. Then along came Miller in 1884, with the same "oversight".

This was all sealed with the 1889 publication of the first edition of Freeborough and Rankin's Chess Openings Ancient and Modern, which explained

Mr. S. A. Charles of Cincinnati, Ohio is named in the American Supplement as the chief analyst of this opening.

The Literary Digest's chess columns suggest that there might be other magazines out there with Jerome Gambit games and analysis by the gambit's inventor, from the mid-1880s to 1900.

Don't get me started...

About five years ago, someone in the rec.games.chess.misc newsgroup asked about the chess player Isidor Gunsberg, noting

chessmetrics.com, sometimes interesting to check for historical purposes, rates Gunsberg as #3 in the world for 1890 and 1891 based on his performances.

He had some pretty nice tournament results, such as

- 1st place DSB Kongress in 1885, ahead of players like Blackburne, Tarrasch, Mackenzie, and Bird

- 2nd place USA Congress in 1889, behind the tied Miksa Weiss and Tchigorin, and ahead of Burn, Blackburne, Max Judd (probably the best player in the USA at that time), Bird, Showalter

- Tied 2nd place London 1900, and lone 2nd place at London 1904

His match results were also notable, such as:

- Victory over Blackburne in 1887 (7/12 to 5/12)

- Drawing with the peak-form Tchigorin in 1890! (11.5/23) This just after Tchigorin`s World Championship match

- Losing the 3rd FIDE-recognised World Championship match to Steinitz in 1890, by 2 games (8.5/19)

Of course,I had to ask if anyone knew if Gunsberg, an openings explorer in his own right, had ever played the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+).

After receiving the obligatory put-down that the opening was "considered unsound by all reputable theoreticians" I started my typical yammering on my favorite opening in response.

George,

Thank you for your comments and the information on the Jerome Gambit! It's a topic I can really get lost in..

> The Jerome Gambit, considered unsound by all reputable theoreticians,

G.H.D. Gossip, in his "Theory of the Chess Openings," 2nd ed, 1879, wrote "the Gambit, which although unsound, affords some highly instructive analysis for less practised players."

William Cook, in his "Synopsis of the Chess Openings," 3rd ed, 1882, wrote that "the Jerome Gambit, which, although unsound, affords some highly instructive analysis."

The "American Supplement to the 'Synopsis,' containing American Inventions In the Chess Openings Together With Fresh Analysis in the Openings Since 1882; Also A List of Chess Clubs in the United States and Canada" edited by J.W. Miller, noted "The 'Jerome Gambit,' 4.BxPch, involves an unsound sacrifice; but it is not an attack to be trifled with. The defense requires study, and is somewhat difficult."

(One book reviewer suggested that the offense required study, too; and that the game was even more difficult for White than for Black!)

Of course, Raymond Keene had the (almost) last word in his "The Complete Book of Gambits" 1992 - "This is totally unsound and should never be tried!"

> first appeared in the American Chess Journal in 1876, according to The Oxford Companion to Chess.

To the best of my knowledge, the first appearance of the Jerome Gambit was in the Dubuque Chess Journal for April 1874, in a small article titled "New Chess Opening." (Yes, I've shared this information with Mr. Whyld, and he has been quite pleasant and supportive in my Jerome Gambit researches.)

>It was recommended by Alonzo Wheeler Jerome of Paxton,Illinois. Jerome was born on 8 March 1834 in Four Mile Point, New York, and died on 22 March 1902 in Springfield, Illinois. His obituary appeared in the 23 March 1902 edition of the Illinois State Journal - page 6, column 3.

I have a copy of the obituary - it is short, about a half-dozen sentences. In light of such a paltry send-off, I can understand why some people would want to write their own death notices.

> The Jerome Gambit (1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. Bxf7+?) cannot be recommended for serious chess since Black gains the advantage after 4...Kxf7 5. > Nxe5+ Nxe5 6. Qh5+ Kf8 7. Qxe5 d6.

There are several refutations of the Jerome Gambit.

The 6...Kf8 line was first given by Jerome, himself, in the July 1874 Dubuque Chess Journal. It has shown up in such fine places as Harding's "Counter Gambits" 1974, ECO "C" 1st ed, 1974, "Batsford Chess Openings," 1st ed, 1982 and "Enciclopedia Dei Gambietti," 1998. Sorensen, in his May 1877 article in Nordisk Skaktidende, "Chess Theory for Beginners," (subsequently translated in Chess Players' Chronicle of August of the same year) recommended 5...Kf8. Of course, 6...Ke3 is also playable.

Jerome, himself, kept things in perspective. The Pittsburg Telegraph, June 8, 1881, wrote "A letter received from Mr. A. W. Jerome calls attention to the fact that he does not claim the Jerome Gambit to be analytically sound, but only that over the board it is sound enough to afford a vast amount of amusement."

Others joined in the jocularity. The Cincinnati Commercial Gazette, in its May 7, 1879 review of Gossip's "Theory" noted "...The Jerome Gambit, which high-toned players sometimes affect to despise because it is radically unsound finds a place, and to this it is certainly entitled. As this opening is not in any Manual, to our knowledge, we transfer it to our columns, with the exception of a few minor variations, and we believe our readers will thank us for so doing."

In a March 13, 1880 review of the 6th ed of the Handbuch, the same author" complained" again: "We are somewhat disappointed that the 'Thorold Variation' of the 'Allgaier Gambit' should be dismissed with only a casual note in the appendix, and that the "Jerome Gambit" should be utterly (even if deservedly) ignored."

Enough. I'll close with a comment from Lasker, in his Chess Magazine, in reply to a correspondent "Ichabodf: - No; the Jerome gambit is not named after St. Jerome. His penances, if he did any, were in atonement of rather minor transgressions compared with the gambit."

Rick Kennedy