Showing posts with label warwar. Show all posts
Showing posts with label warwar. Show all posts

Thursday, December 26, 2019

Jerome Gambit: Sacrifice/Blunder?


A Jerome Gambit win, and some handy endgame play in another game, will allow me to move on to the 3rd round of play in both the "Italian Game Classic" and "Italian Game Battlegrounds" tournaments at Chess.com. There will be a bit of a wait, however, until I can play a few more Jerome Gambits, as each tournament has a number of games to complete before the round is finished.

The turning point in the following game reminds me of the light-hearted comment about giving up material: if it succeeds, it's a "sacrifice", if it fails, it's a "blunder". I would love to say that my chess has matured to the point where I made an intuitive sacrifice, but I have to admit that it was more of a fortunate oversight.

perrypawnpusher - mallack
Italian Game Battlegrounds, Chess.com, 2019

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 




4...Kxf7 5. Nxe5+ Nxe5 6. Qh5+ Kf8



The Jerome Defense, first suggested by Alonzo Wheeler Jerome in an article in the Dubuque Chess Journal of July, 1874, and seen, initially, in Jaeger - Jerome, correspondence, 1880 (1-0, 40).

The Database has 665 game examples, with White scoring 50%. My own experience is a bit better: in 36 games, I scored 79%. (That probably reflects experience with the line.)

7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qg3 

As I noted in an earlier post
I experimented with Jerome's 8.Qf4+ in perrypawnpusher - Capt. Mandrake, Jerome Gambit 3 thematic tournament, ChessWorld.com, 2008 (1-0, 9) and perrypawnpusher - LeeBradbury, "Italian Game" Thematic, Chess.com, 2012 (1-0, 36).
I also tried 8.Qc3 in perrypawnpusher - Raankh, blitz, FICS, 2009 (0-1, 22).
There is not much difference in the strength between these two moves and the text, or even 8.Qh5, if Stockfish 9 is to be believed.

8...Nf6 9.Nc3 

I am not sure why I chose the text move over 9.d3. Before this game, I was 3 - 1 with 9.Nc3 and 5 - 1 with 9.d3. The two lines sometimes transpose, and 9.d3 brings White one step closer to resolving the issue of Black's annoying dark square Bishop, so, perhaps it should be played first.

9...Be6 

This was also played by Abhishek29 against me earlier this year. The move is good, and preserves Black's advantage, although it has the slight taint of placing the Bishop (possibly) in a place where an advancing White f-pawn might hit it.

10.O-O g6 

This move, a novelty, according to The Database, does several things. It resists a possible f2-f4-f5 by White; it protects the Black g-pawn from White's Queen, and it gives the Black King a place to step out of the way, to castle-by-hand and allow his Rook to get into play.

11.d3 Kg7 12.Na4 

Seriously?!

I was going to try this move, after the trials of my game against warwar, in the 3rd round of the Italian Battleground tournament (at Chess.com) earlier this year? Sure, the positions are not the same, but warwar did not meekly retreat his Bishop to b6, he brought it to d4, then e5 - and then threw in ...Nh5 for good measure. It was a messy game, even if I did weasel out a win.

Then, there was the additional anxiety related to my game against Abhishek29, when he did retreat the Bishop, and I was able to exchange it off.

Certainly, it was a time for in-depth concrete analysis - so, of course, I crossed my fingers for luck and just made the Knight move...

12...Bb6

Whew!

After the game, Stockfish 10 pointed out that 12...Bd4 13.c3 Be5 14.f4 would be hit by 14...Nh5. In fact, 13...Nh5 would have been good for Black, too. Yikes.

13.Nxb6 axb6 14.f4 Rxa2 

This took me by surprise. It should not have - in a similar position against Abhishek29, I had prevented the capture by playing a2-a3. But, is the loss of the pawn a big deal, any way? It turns out, it is not. This is the sacrifice/blunder of material that I referred to in the introduction to this game.

15.Rxa2 Bxa2 16.b3 

Black's Bishop has left his King, and is trapped. It is vulnerable to capture in a couple of moves, which explains Black's next choice.

16...Qa8 

In for a penny, in for a pound.

Black has grabbed the pawn, and now feels the need to protect the locked-in Bishop, even at the cost of removing another defender from the Kingside.

17.Bb2

This move reminded me of a booklet on the 2.b3 Sicilian that I bought in 1977, from Ron's Postal Chess Club, of all places. At the time, I was advancing the b-pawn one step against 1...c5 if I was feeling conservative, or two steps (the wing gambit) if I was feeling rowdy; and I even tried 2.b3 against the French and Caro Kann defenses. Nowadays you can find Sabotaging the Sicilian, French & Caro-Kann with 2.b3 by Jerzy Konikowski and Marek Soszynski.

Oh - back to the game. White's attack is about to come together.

17...Rf8 18.f5 

18...Qa5 19.fxg6 hxg6 20.Qf4 g5 21.Bxf6+ 

After the game, Stockfish 10 preferred 21...Qg4. I wanted my piece back, right away.

21...Kg8 22.Qg4 Qd2 

Black's Queen cannot save the day.

23.Bxg5 Black resigned



You probably saw the cute checkmate, instead, with 23.Qe6+ Kh7 24.Qe7 Rf7 25.Qxf7+ Kh6 26.Qg7+ Kh5 27.Qh7+ Kg4 28.Qh3#.

Please note the stranded Bishop on a2.

Saturday, April 20, 2019

Jerome Gambit: Different Line, Same Result

The latest internet game from Vlasta Fejfar shows that the Jerome Gambit is not just a one-time-surprise opening. Having fallen to the Jerome, his opponent reassesses his chances and his line of play, and tries something new. Alas, for the defender, White still triumphs.

vlastous - ADELAZIZ
internet, 2019

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 



4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Kf8 



The Jerome Defense, courtesy Alonzo Wheeler Jerome, who also brings you the Jerome Gambit.

7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qf4+ Nf6 



ADELAZIZ varies from the 8...Qf6 that he played when the two contested a game earlier. Then, vlastous was willing to exchange Queens and make his extra "Jerome pawns" count.

9.O-O Bd4 10.c3 Be5 


Reminding me of perrypawnpusher - warwar, "Italian Battleground", Chess.com, 2019 - but in current game, things turn out better for White.

11.Qh4 g5 

A smart move. Taking the pawn would expose White to dangers along the g-file.

12.Qh6+ Kf7 13.d4 Bf4 14.Bxf4 gxf4 15.e5 dxe5 16.dxe5 Nd5 17.Re1 Be6


Black still has a piece for two pawns, but the uneasy position of his King suggests that if anyone has an edge, it is White.

18.c4 Nb4 19.Nc3 Rg8 20.Ne4 Nd3



The Knight attacks White's Rook and pawns, while protecting his advanced pawn. However, a pin along the d-file will cause trouble. Better was 20...Qe7, Which could also be answered by 21.Rad1.

21.Rad1 b6 

Now the roof falls in.

22.Rxd3 Qxd3 23.Qf6+ Ke8 Black resigned



Black will lose his Queen (and more) or be checkmated.

Thursday, February 21, 2019

Jerome Gambit: My Opponent Knows What He Is Doing (Part 4)


[continued from previous post]

perrypawnpusher - warwar
"Italian Battleground", Chess.com, 2019



At this point in the game, I was still thinking about moving my King to the center to help advance the pawns, although I couldn't figure out exactly how. In the mean time, my Rook on f8 was designed to keep Black's King away from interfering in the center.

Here, my opponent took several days "vacation" from the site, and I worked on my portable chess set like it was a crystal ball (the time control was 3 days per move). For starters - what was the reasoning behind my opponent's last move? (In hindsight, I can see that he missed a decent drawing line - by returning material - but what was he trying to do with his Bishop on c3?)

38...Bd7

It turns out that my Rook pins down its opposite, and forces Black's light square Bishop to stay on the a4-e8 diagonal, for protection. With that paralysis of pieces, it was possible to see that Black's other Bishop was now going to be stuck on the wrong side of the pawn chain. (It had arrived on the a5-e1 diagonal to forestall b3-b4.)

39.Bc5 

The key. Now my Bishop can escort the pawn through b4, on the way to promotion. My King can stay at home and mark his counterpart, after all.

39.Bc5

The Bishop can reach out and help.

39...Bc6 40.b4 h5 41.b5 Bd7 42.b6 Black resigned



Once again, saved by the "Jerome pawns", but only after some difficult play.

Hats off to warwar for a challenging game. 

Tuesday, February 19, 2019

Jerome Gambit: My Opponent Knows What He Is Doing (Part 3)



[continued from previous post]


perrypawnpusher - warwar
"Italian Battleground", Chess.com, 2019


I had reached this point in the game, figuring that I probably had a draw, wondering if I could develop more than that.

My first thought was to bring my King to the center to support the advancing pawns.

31.Kg1 Bd4+ 32.Kh1 Bf6 

Okay, that solved two problems for me. Trying to get my King out of the corner would lead to checks by the Bishop - so, maybe that wasn't the best plan after all - and Black's willingness to repeat positions, splitting the point, suggested that maybe my position was better off than I realized. 

33.Bc5

Stopping a check from d4, and drawing a bead on the a7 pawn.

33...axb3 34.axb3 Rb8 

Black targets the base of my pawn chain, but the danger was at the head. This definitely shifted the game in my favor.

35.d6 Re8 

Black cannot afford to play 35...Rxb3, after all, because 36.e7 Rb8 37.d7 and White will promote both pawns, winning a Bishop and a Rook for them.

36.e7

A "blunder", according to the Chess.com post-game analysis. Stockfish 10 agreed, preferring 36.Rxf6+ gxf6 37.d7 Rxe6 38.d8/Q Re1+ 39.Bg1.

36...Bc8 37.Bxa7 Bc3

Here, Black could have returned his extra piece for two pawns and drawing chances: 37...Bxe7 38.Re1 Kf7 39.dxe7 Rxe7 40.Rxe7+ Kxe7 when, despite being down a couple of pawns, the Bishops-of-opposite-colors endgame would give him drawing chances. We both missed this.

38.Rf8 

With 4 connected, passed pawns for the piece, I was pretty sure that I could find a way to win.


[to be continued]

Sunday, February 17, 2019

Jerome Gambit: My Opponent Knows What He Is Doing (Part 2)




[continued from previous post]

perrypawnpusher - warwar
"Italian Battleground", Chess.com, 2019


10.O-O Re8 11.d3 Kg8 12.Na4


My dad used the expression "fat, dumb, and happy" to describe someone who was content and clueless. All of that is reflected in my 12th move.

Black has castled-by-hand, he is at least even in development, and he still has his annoying dark squared Bishop. What would be more reasonable for White than to swap his Knight for that Bishop? After all, in many "quiet" Jerome Gambit games, Bill Wall has gone after the "minor exchange", hasn't he?

As the game unfolds, it will be clear that I should have tried the thematic move 12.Bg5.

By the way, the after-game computer analysis from Chess.com passed by this move without comment. It is interesting to note that the computer analysis at lichess.org, looking at the game Chess-for-All - Sveti14, blitz, lichess, 2017 (0-1, 30), had criticized its 12.h3?! as an "inaccuracy", and recommended 12.Na4. (I wish I could blame my move choice on this - but, no.)

12...Bd4

As I mentioned in the previous post, this current game and my Round 3 game against Abhishek29 had started out with the same 8 moves. Curiously, though, I had also tried the Knight-for-Bishop swap in that game, after my opponent had similarly advanced his Bishop to d4 before retreating it to b6: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Kf8 7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qg3 Nf6 9.Nc3 Be6 10.O-O Kf7 11.d3 Rf8 12.Na4 Bd4 (a novelty, according to The Database) 13.c3 Bb6 14.Nxb6 axb6, etc. 


13.c3 Be5

I had expected, as a matter of course, 13...Bb6 14.Nxb6 axb6, again being happy that my opponent had wasted a move advancing his Bishop. I was now even happier that my opponent had trapped his own Bishop.

14.f4 Nh5

An unpleasant surprise - possibly prepared beforehand.

15.Qf3 Nxf4 16.Bxf4 Rf8 



I was not expecting this, either. Clearly, things were getting out of hand. (There was also nothing wrong with the simple 16...Bxf4.)

After some consideration, I decided my best chance was to give up any thought of "attack" and enter an endgame where Black would be objectively better, but, at club level, where my extra pawns would give White chances against the extra piece. 

17.Bg5 Rxf3 18.Bxd8 Rxf1+ 

Sensible and consistent, but he might have tried 18... Rxd3.

19.Rxf1 b5 20.Bxc7 bxa4 



It turns out that Black's dark square Bishop was safe, after all. My Knight was the piece in danger.

21.d4 Bf6 22.Bxd6 Ba6 23.Re1 Re8 




Black's Bishops are scary, but White's pawns should be able to cause some trouble, as well. Things unfold in an orderly manner.

After the game, Stockfish 10 still gave Black an edge, although it preferred 23...Bc4 to the text.

24.b3 Kf7

Moving the King toward the center of action. There was nothing wrong with throwing in 24...axb3 25.axb3, and then choosing 25...Bd3 instead.

25.e5 Bg5 26.c4 Bd2 27.Rf1+ Kg6 28.d5 Be3+ 29.Kh1 Bd4 30.e6 Bf6 

What gives the advantage, the piece or the pawns?

I started to breathe easier when I realized that Black's light square Bishop was blocked in by my pawns, balancing things out. Drawish? I hoped so.

After the game, Stockfish 10 suggested that by this point I had actually gained the advantage. I'm still a bit skeptical. There is no question, however, that in club play, the chances of the pawns have to be better.


[to be continued] 

Friday, February 15, 2019

Jerome Gambit: My Opponent Knows What He Is Doing (Part 1)





While it looks like I am headed for a 3rd place finish (out of 6) in the 3rd round of the "Italian Battleground" tournament at Chess.com, I will at least have some Jerome Gambit tales to tell from the experience.

I have already shared my 3rd round game perrypawnpusher - Abhishek29, "Italian Battleground", Chess.com, 2019 (1-0, 35) - my second win in this tournament against that opponent, having defeated him in in Round 1 - see perrypawnpusher - Abhishek29, "Italian Battleground", Chess.com, 2019 (1-0, 19).

The current game is a rematch with an opponent that I faced in Round 2 - see perrypawnpusher - warwar, "Italian Battleground", Chess.com, 2019 (1-0, 39). I was a bit concerned, the way "real" chessplayers are concerned about "real" chess openings: how much had he learned about the Jerome Gambit in the meantime?

It turned out to be an interesting battle between the "Jerome pawns" and the defender's extra piece, but, most of all, between someone who had prepared the opening and someone who had to improvise in the middlegame and endgame.

perrypawnpusher - warwar
"Italian Battleground", Chess.com, 2019

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 




When the game was over, the Chess.com site offered to do a quick computer analysis. Not surprisingly, this move was labelled a blunder.

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Kf8 



warwar adopts the Jerome Defense, first suggested by Alonzo Wheeler Jerome in his analysis in an article in the Dubuque Chess Journal of July, 1874. It was first played in Jaeger - Jerome, correspondence, 1880 (1-0, 40).

Interestingly enough, Abhishek29 was playing the same defense against me in the same round, too. My record, at that point, against the line was 25 - 6 - 3, a decent 78% score.

7.Qxe5 d6

As I wrote in the article that I had prepared for Kaissiber (unfortunately, never published)
The defenses 6…Kf8 and 6…Ng6 have had their supporters and detractors, depending on how each evaluated the alternatives – was it better to hold onto a little material and avoid complications, or to enter them confidently, knowing that they would turn the game even more in your favor? 
Jerome (DCJ 7/1874) first suggested 6…Kf8. He followed it with 7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qf4+ Nf6 9.c3 Kf7 10.d4 Bb6 11.e5 dxe5 12.dxe5 Re8 13.0-0 Kg8 14.exf6 Qxf6 15.Qxf6 gxf6 16.Bh6 “and White has a pawn ahead.” (Actually, the game is even; but Jerome missed that earlier his 11.e5 was premature, as after the pawn exchange 12…Qd3 would be crushing – Paul Keiser, personal communication. The alternative 8…Ke8 was seen in 5 games in the Yetman – Farmer 2008 match.) 
As Sorensen (NS 5/1877) did not mention 6…Kf8, it was not touched upon by other writers until Freeborough and Rankin (COAM, 1889) suggested that it led to a safe game for Black, giving the line 7.Qxe5 Qe7 8.Qf5+ Ke8 9.Nc3 d6 10.Qf3 Qf7 (or 10...Nf6!) 11.Qe2 Nh6 (or 11...Ne7 or 11...Nf6) with “a superior position or game” to Black. 
A hundred years after Jerome, Harding, in his Counter Gambits (1974), varied, after 7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qf4+ Nf6 with 9.d3 Kg8 10.Nc3 Qe8 11.Be3 Bb4 12.0-0 Be6 13.Ne2 Qh5 14.Nd4 Bd7 15.c3 Bc5, advantage to Black. His comment in The Italian Game (1977) was that after 7…d6, White was left “without genuine compensation for his piece.” He sagely recommended the 6…Kf8 line as “other lines would allow White to attack the exposed black king or to win back the sacrificed material.”

8.Qg3 

I experimented with Jerome's 8.Qf4+ in perrypawnpusher - Capt. Mandrake, Jerome Gambit 3 thematic tournament, ChessWorld.com, 2008 (1-0, 9) and perrypawnpusher - LeeBradbury, "Italian Game" Thematic, Chess.com, 2012 (1-0, 36).

I also tried 8.Qc3 in perrypawnpusher - Raankh, blitz, FICS, 2009 (0-1, 22).

There is not much difference in the strength between these two moves and the text, or even 8.Qh5, if Stockfish 9 is to be believed.

8...Nf6 9.Nc3 Kf7 

Abhishek29 chose 9...Be6 in our Round 3 game.

Years ago, perrypawnpusher - klixar, blitz, FICS, 2007 (1-0, 33) continued 9...Ng4.

perrypawnpusher - truuf, blitz, FICS, 2011 (0-1, 32) continued with the text move.


[to be continued]

Friday, November 23, 2018

Tournament Update: Ahead of the Scrum

Image result for free clip art top of the pile

As J.M. Barrie wrote in Peter Pan
All of this has happened before, and it will all happen again.
And, so it is that, once again, somehow - thank you, Jerome Gambit - I find myself at the top of the heap in my section in the second round of the "Italian Battleground" tournament at Chess.com.

With one game not yet completed, it looks like I will be followed in the standings by four players who will each have the same score. It will be up to the tie breaks to decide which two, among warwar, docfb, manospawn, and vasbur, will join me in advancing to the third round. (I won a Jerome Gambit against warwar, the only player in this group to allow the opening. If he is interested in a return match, I supect he is happy to have the edge in the tie breaks at this point.)

In the other section, two games remain to finish, but XristosGikas and 275Jukka have secured their advance, while Abhishek29 and Alfonso10 are likely to be the ones relying on tie breaks to secure an advance for one of them.

If my predictions hold, I am likely to be the 4th highest rated amongst the final 6 - but, then again, I will have my secret weapon.