Jerome Gambit: History in Play

My first win with the Jerome Gambit, in the second round of the "Italian Game Classic" tournament at Chess.com, was a bit of a journey through the opening's history.

An unfortunate slip by my opponent allowed me a tactical shot that brought the game to an early conclusion.

perrypawnpusher - PDX84
Italian Game Classic, Chess.com, 2019

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 

Black courageously thinks of holding onto both sacrificed pieces. The compter chess analysis at Chess.com, after the game, identified the move as "best".

7.Qf5+

Alonzo Wheeler Jerome first suggested this move in the April 4, 1874 issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal. He also played 7.f4 and 7.O-O in correspondence games against S.A. Charles, and suggested 7.b4 "for analysis"; this was covered in the October, 1881 issue of Brentano's Chess Monthly.

A check of The Database shows 507 games with 7.Qf5+, with White scoring 48%, as opposed to 517 games with 7.f4, with White scoring 61%. There are no games with 7.b4.

7...Kd6 8.f4 Qf6 9.fxe5+ Qxe5 10.Qf3 

Not 10.Qxe5+ this time. That move has given me mixed results, and a loss most recently: perrypawnpusher - djdave28, Italian Game Tournament, Chess.com, 2014, (1-0, 22); perrypawnpusher - djdave28, Italian Game Tournament, Chess.com 2015, (1-0, 32); and perrypawnpusher - Altotemmi, Giuoco Piano Tournament, Chess.com, 2016, (0-1, 51). 

The Queen exchange is at least as old as Jerome, A - Jaeger, D, correspondence, 1878 (0-1, 68).

10...Nf6 

This move makes a lot of sense.

Jerome faced 10...Ne7 in a correspondence game against Jaeger in 1878 (0-1, 68).

 Lowe,E - Cudmore,D, correspondence, 1881, continued 10...b5 (½-½, 48).

Keeble,J - Cubitt,J, Norwich 1886, continued 10...c6 (1-0, 17).

11.d3 Ke7 

Black dodges the crudest of threats - 12.Bf4, pinning his Queen to his King. The idea is at least as old as Vazquez - Giraudy, Mexico, 1876 (remove White's Queen Rook) 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.d4 Bxd4 9.c3 Bb6 10.f4 Qf6 11.fxe5+ Qxe5 12.Bf4 Qxf4 13.Qxf4+ Ke7 14.Rf1 Nh6 15.Qe5+ Kd8 16.Qxg7 Re8 17.Qg5+ Re7 18.Rf8 checkmate. Still, I've scored points from this "Optical Illusion" variation of the Jerome Gambit - see "Optical Illusion (1)", "Optical Illusion (2)" and "Disdainful Defender Defense".

Instead, 11...Kc6 was seen in Jerome, A - Colburn, correspondence 1879 (0-1, 34) and Jerome, A - Charles, S.A., correspondence, 1881 (unfinished).

12.Nc3 Bb4 

Pinning the White Knight to keep it off of d5.

Instead:

12...g5 was seen in Jerome, A - Shinkman, W, Iowa, 1874 (0-1, 21);

12...d6 was seen in Jerome, A - Brownson, O, Iowa, 1875 (1-0, 43);

12...c6 was seen in Jerome, A - Amateur, off hand game, 1876 (1-0, 20); and

12...d5 was seen in Jerome, A - Pane, M, correspondence, 1878 (1-0, 41).

13.Bd2

I was amused to see that I had played 13.O-O here, years ago, in perrypawnpusher - PREMK, blitz, FICS, 2005. The idea was that 13...Bxc3 14.bxc3 Qxc3 15.Qg3!? would give White good play for the sacrificed pawn.

13...Rf8 14.O-O d6 

Instead, in the post mortem, Komodo 10 recommended the brutal 14...Bd6, with the idea of forcing exchanges to eliminate White's attacking chances and highlight Black's piece-for-a-pawn advantage, e.g. 15.g3 c6 16.Bf4 Bc5+ 17.Kg2 Qh5 18.Na4 Qxf3+ 19.Rxf3 d6 20.Nxc5 dxc5 21.Raf1 Bg4 22.R3f2 Be6 

15.Nd5+ Black resigned

White will recover his sacrificed piece. He will be a pawn up, with better development and King safety. Black decided not to play on.

Jerome Gambit: History Reset

NN - Blackburne, London, 1884

The other day, I stumbled over a remark (from May 22, 2017) by zanzibar, at the Chessgames.com website. He was commenting on the (in)famous Jerome Gambit game,  NN - Blackburne, casual game, London, 1884, and noted

Fine uses a position from this game (p088, d135), after Black's 12th move, but omits the White queen on a8.

zanzibar was referring to Reuben Fine's The Middle Game in Chess (David McKay, 1952), the chapter on "The Mating Attack". After giving the diagram (see above), Fine wrote [descriptive notation changed to algebraic notation]

Blackburne also found the mate in diagram 135 during a blindfold seance. He played 1...Qxh3+!! 2.gxh3 Bxe4 mate

It is likely that, in his diagram, GM Fine left off White's Queen from a8, where it was placed in the game, for instructional purposes, as it arrived on that square after accepting Black's double Rook sacrifice, in the most scruffy of chess openings, where White had sacrificed two pieces - all too much distraction from the case at hand.

GM Fine's contention that the game was played blindfold also raises an eyebrow. The Illustrated London News' May 10,1884 account of the game makes no mention of Blackburne playing blindfold. Indeed, Mr Blackburne's Games at Chess (1899) places the game in the "Games Played Off-Hand, Simultaneously or at Odds" chapter, rather than the "Games Played Blindfold" chapter.

Interestingly, the Blackburne position in The Middle Game in Chess follows one given by Fine as

reached by Pillsbury in a blindfold exhibition 

What is a bit odd about this is that Pillsbury was, according to the diagram, playing the Black pieces - usually the blindfold player is given the White pieces. For example, Jaques N. Pope's Harry Nelson Pillsbury American Chess Champion (Pawn Island Press, 1996), contains almost 250 blindfold games, and Pillsbury has White in all but one of the games. While P.W. Sergeant and W.H. Watts, in their Pillsbury's Chess Career (American Chess Bulletin, 1922) suggest that "he must have played many thousands such games" - only one of their 44 blindfold games had Pillsbury with Black.

Fortunately, Pope comes to the rescue. On the first page of his "Other Games" chapter, he gives the following position, from which follows "a pretty combination he played as black in a knight odds game [emphasis mine] in 1899." Popes's reference is Vol. XIX, no. 22, November 25, 1899, the Literary Digest, which gives the piece placement in a "Pillsbury Brilliancy", describing it as coming from an

offhand game betwen Pillsbury and a strong amateur, the latter securing the odds of a Kt. 

Amateur - Pillsbury, 1899 (Kt odds)

 1...Qf7 2.Bxe4 Reaching the position that Fine started with in his diagram [descriptive notation changed to algebraic notation]. 2...Qf1+ 3.Bg1 Qf3+ 4.Bxf3 Bxf3 checkmate.

(I mean no offense to the memory GM Fine, whose chess set I would have been unworthy to carry. History needed a reset, and I've done it before.) 

"A sparkling variation to the tiresome Piano game"

From the September 1876 issue of the American Chess Journal:

A.W. Jerome of Paxton, Ills, and D.P. Norton, of Des Moines, Iowa, are contesting a series of games by correspondence for the purpose of testing the strength of the "Double Opening" invented by Mr. Jerome. One of the games is given in this number. So far the Des Moines player has proved too much for the "Double Opening."

Jerome - Norton, D. P.
correspondence, 1876
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 Nf3+ 9.Kf1 c6 10.gxf3 Qe7 11.b4 Bb6 12.Bb2 Kc7 13.Qe5+ Qxe5 14.Bxe5+ d6 15.Bxg7 Bh3+ 16.Ke2 Bg2 17.Rd1 Ne7 18.Bxh8 Ng6 19.d4 Rxh8 20.Kf2 Nxf4 21.c3 Rg8 22.Nd2 Kd7 23.Ke3 Rf8 24.Rg1 Bd8 25.Kf2 Rg8 26.Ke3 Nh3 27.f4 Nxg1 28.Rxg1 Rg4 29.Nf1 Bh3 30.Ng3 Rh4 31.Nf5 Bxf5 32.exf5 Bf6 33.Rg3 Rxh2 34.a4 Rh1 35.a5 Re1+ 36.Kf3 Re7 37.Rh3 c5 38.bxc5 dxc5 39.Rh6 cxd4 40.cxd4 Bxd4 41.f6 Rf7 42.Ke4 Bxf6 0–1


From the November 1876 issue of the American Chess Journal:

Jerome's Double Opening

From Mr. A.W. Jerome of Paxton, Ills, inventor of "Jerome's Double Opening" we have received following studies in regard to a comment on a game which appeared in the September Journal and willingly publish them as throwing some light upon a line of attack but little known, and therefore of interest to those who admire variety and novelty in the Royal Game.

Paxton, Illinois
10/21/86

Dear American Chess Journal,
Dear Sir -

In your notes (September Journal) you say, referring to my games with Norton: "So far the Des Moines player has proven too much for the Double Opening." There is an inaccuracy of considerable magnitude in the above statement. It should read "too much for the Paxton player."

The man who beats Mr. Norton in any opening is a much stronger player than I.

To illustrate the strength of the Opening I enclosed a card, containing the score of an off-hand game over the board, played against a man who is at least as strong a player as I, and who used to pooh-pooh the opening. He has more respect for it now.

Jerome - Amateur offhand game, USA, 1876 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.Qf3 Nf6 11.d3 Ke7 12.Nc3 c6 13.Bf4 Qh5 14.e5 Ng4 15.0-0-0 g6 16.Ne4 Nf2 17.Bg5+ Ke6 18.Qf6+ Kd5 19.c4+ Kd4 20.e6 mate

I also gave the moves in a game I am now playing with Mr. Norton which I think, proves that the "Double Opening" has something in it. If you see any winning move for Black please point it out.

When he transmitted his 15th move, he wrote: "It seems to me your attack is about 'busted'."

Later with his 17th move he says "Your attack is strong as well as pretty."

And again: "The position is critical and very interesting the neatest I have seen for some time."

I think the position is the natural result of the "weak" Double Opening and not from weak play on Mr. Norton's part.

I may yet lose the game, but claim that the Opening has a "reasonable chance of winning," which is sufficient to constitute a "sound opening." It is not required that an Opening shall be sure to win. There is no such Opening contained in chess; at least none that I know of.

Mr. Norton would have played the Double Opening on Mr. H. Had he (H) given him the opportunity.

I think Norton is about half converted, notwithstanding he has won or drawn all the finished games.

Game 40 September Journal I ought to have won, or drawn at least, but he outplayed me.

Yours truly,
A. W. Jerome

Jerome - Norton, D. P. correspondence (unfinished), 1876 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.d4 Bxd4 7.Qxd4 Qf6 8.Qd1 Ne7 9.0-0 Rf8 10.f4 N5c6 11.c3 Kg8 12.Be3 d6 13.Nd2 b6 14.f5 d5 15.Qc2 dxe4 16.Nxe4 Qf7 17.f6

And here the author of the Double Opening asks "Now what is Black's best move?" From a cursory glance at the situation it seems to us that 17...Ba6 would be a satisfactory reply for Black.

We are not at all disposed to turn up the nose at Mr. Jerome's pet, as he seems to infer; on the contrary we regard it with favor, and therefore have frequently given games at this opening an airing in the Journal, thus introducing it to the chess public, and subjecting it to that criticism and analysis which will speedily determine its claim to a place in chess literature.

We consider it stronger than the Harvey-Evans and not much inferior to the Cochrane attack, but like most openings where a piece is sacrificed to obtain a violent attack, the first player will generally find himself the loser when met by a careful and steady defence.

For this reason it will never find favor among match players or the professional representatives of the game. But among the lighter lances - those who cultivate chess an an amusement and not as a means of obtaining bread and butter - it will, no doubt, become quite popular, as it affords a sparkling variation to the tiresome Piano game.

The Jerome Gambit Article (Part 7)

Here continues the Jerome Gambit article that I wrote for Kaissiber, a decade ago.

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.”

The first mention of the 6…Ng6 defense can be found in Jerome – Brownson 1875 (DCJ 3/1875) where Jerome won in 28 moves: 7.Qd5+ Ke8 8.Qxc5 d6 9.Qc3 Nf6 10.d3 c6 11.0-0 Kd7 12.f4 Qb6+ 13.Kh1 Kc7 14.Qe1 Re8 15.b3 Nd5 16.Qg3 Nb4 17.Na3 Bd7 18.c3 Nxa2 19.f5 Ne5 20.d4 Qxb3 21.dxe5 dxe5 22.Rb1 Qxc3 23.Be3 a6 24.Qxg7 b5 25.Rf3 Kc8 26.Rd1 Rd8 27.Bb6 Kb7 28.Bxd8 and wins.

The second mention of 6…Ng6 was by Sorensen (NS 5/1877) who gave Jerome’s 7.Qd5+ a "!"

After Jerome’s 10.d3, Gossip (Theory, 1879), evaluated the position, “…White has still some attack to compensate him for his lost piece; besides which, Black has lost the privilege of castling, and is moreover a pawn minus…” This was echoed by Charles (Brentano, 10/1881) - “White still has some attack” - and by Cook (Synopsis, 1882) –“White has some attack to compensate for his lost piece" - but this seems optimistic. (Lanning – Zim, Utah 1879 saw 10…Rf8 11.Bg5 Nd5 12.ed?! Qxg5 13.0-0 Nh4 14.g3 and Black announced mate in 8.)

Gossip said Brownson’s 10…c6 11.0-0 Kd7 was

a line of play which we venture to think objectionable for

Black, to say the least, inasmuch as it blocks the Queen's Bishop,

and unnecessarily retards the development of Black's game. We

should prefer the sortie of the Bishop to King's third at once.”

Later, he evaluated the position after 10.d3 c6 11.0-0 Be6 as equal (Vade 

Mecum, 1891).

Freeborough and Rankin’s (COAM, 1889) alternative 10…Kf7, seems simple and good for Black.

It is clear that after 6…Kf8 or 6…Ng6, if White is going to have any chance for success, he is again going to have to rely on what use he can get out of his extra pawns, against Black’s extra piece. Jerome – Brownson 1874 is one (flawed) example. In the match game Vazquez – Carrington, 1876, and the correspondence game Charlick- Mann, Australia, 1881 the White Queen retreated to e3 instead of c3, on move nine, and the first players able to do that, winning in 34 and 72 moves, respectively.

7.Qf5+

This was Jerome’s first suggestion (DCJ, 4/1874) in this position. He also played 7.f4 and 7.O-O, and suggested 7.b4 “for analysis” (Brentano, 10/1881).

After 7.f4 d6 Jerome lost an 1881correspondence game to Charles with 8.f5 Kd7 (8…Ke7 was likewise better for Black in Jerome –Zimmerman, correspondence 1880, but 1-0, 21 when Black blundered); 9.d3 Nf6 10.Qd1 Nxe4, and another with 8.Qh3+ Ke7 9.f5 (although Charles returned a piece prematurely with 9…Bxf5) (Brentano, 10/1881).

Winning back one of White’s two sacrificed pieces after 7.f4 d6 with 8.fe de seems more logical for the first player, but he remains too undeveloped to claim an attack. The optimistic 7.f4 d6 8.d4 was played in an 1878 game in Italy, and led to an amusing miniature:  8…Bxd4 (8…Nf6! Turns the tables, from blackburne – Wilmy, a Banks internet game, 2004) 9.c3 Bb6 10.fxe5 dxe5 11.Na3 Nf6 12.Qf5+ Kd6? 13.Nc4+! Kc5 14.Qxe5+ Kxc4 15.b3+ Kd3 16.Bf4 Kc2 17.Rc1+ Kb2 18.c4+ Ka3 19.Rc2 Re8 and White announced mate (Nuova Rivista, 1878).

A recent suggestion by Schiller (UCO, 1998) after 7.f4 is 7…Qf6, which looks good for Black as well. His assessment of the position after 7.f4 is worth noting

            White will win back one of the sacrificed pieces. Black

should react calmly be developing and protecting the king. It is

useful to keep in mind that for an attack to succeed the attacker

usually requires greater force than that which defends the king.

Here the Black king is surrounded by pieces, and White has only

 the queen and a pair of pawns. The Black king can retreat to e7,

but this would confine the black queen. Therefore the correct

move [7…Qf6] suggests itself.

After 7.O-O Charles (Brentano, 10/1881) gave 7...d6 as best (7…g6 8.Qh3+ followed by 9.Qc3; or 7…Qf6 8.b4 Qg6 9.Qh3+ Kd6 10.bc+ Kc6 11.d4) noting that after 8.Nc3 Nf6 9.Qd1 the move 9…Nc6 could be safely played. He gave the alternative 9…Kf7 10.d4 Bg4 11.f3 (or 11.Qd2 Bb6 12.de de) Nxf3 12.gf Bh3 with a better game. The correspondence game Jerome – Charles 1881 continued with Black returning pieces for pawns and positional advantage: 9…Nd3 10.cd Kf7 11.Ne2 Bb6 12.Kh1 Ng4 13.d4 Nxh2 14.Kxh2 Qh4+ 15.Kg1 Qxe4 16.d3 Qg4 17.Be3 d5 18.f3 Qe6 19.Bf2 c6.

No one else except the Gambit’s originator seems to have hazarded 7.O-O, and, as it simply leaves White two pieces down, there is no reason for anyone to follow closely in his footsteps.

7…Kd6 8.f4

Again, this is Jerome’s first suggestion (DCJ, 4/1874).

Jerome (DCJ, 1/1875) also looked at 8.d4, a move about which Sorensen (NS, 1877) said breezily, “It is impossible to decide whether this attacking move is stronger than a multitude of others which offer themselves in this interesting position, and of which we especially like 8.f4 and 8.Na3, but it seems clear every case into what abysses Black is plunging.” 

After 8.d4 Bxd4 9.Na3 two of the three defenses that Jerome (DCJ, 1/1875) presented (9…Ne7, 9...Ke7) were sufficient for Black’s advantage, as they left the second player two pieces up. The third (9…Qf6) led to White’s advantage.

Sorensen (NS, 5/1877) repaired for White the line 9…Ne7 10.Qh3 Qf8 by replacing Jerome’s 11.O-O with the consistent 11.Nb5+ which brings danger to Black’s King.

He copied Jerome’s line 9…Qf6 10.Nb5+ Kc5 11.Nxd4 Qxf5 12.Nxf5 g6 13.Be3+ Kc6 14.Nd4+ Kd6 15.O-O-O Ke7 16.Nb5 and said “White has the best position” – but this would not be the case after the correct 13…Kb5.

Finally, Sorensen replaced Jerome’s 9…Ke7 10.Qh3 (10.Nb5 is better, but it comes to naught) d6 11.Qh4+ Ke8 with 9…c6 noting “with this move Black escapes.” The recommended 9.c6 showed up in 4 of the Yetman – Farmer games, which finished 1-2-1.

Sorensen also suggested the direct 8.Na3 which “appears to offer favorable chances for White” according to Gossip (Theory, 1879), although it is hard to see anything but misery for White after the straightforward 8…Bxa3.

8…Qf6

Jack Young, in a Randspringer article (#6, 1990-1991), reported facing 8…Nf3+ (“Foreseeing the loss of a piece, Black gives one back for some ferocious counterplay”) 8…Qe7 and 8…Qh4+ 9.g3 Qf6 in this position, in games against dedicated chess computers (e.g. Chess Challenger 10, Super Constellation). His successes were more due to the weaknesses of the play of the machines, not the strengths of his positions with the white pieces.

The active 8…Nf3+ had actually occurred over 100 years earlier in an 1876 correspondence game between Jerome and D.P. Norton (0-1, 42). Then 9.gf seems best, leading to an unclear position with mutually-unsafe Kings after 9…Qh4+ 10.Kd1. Jerome played 9.Kf1, escaped danger with some tactical tricks and Norton oversights, but was out-played in the ending.

Also, 8…Qh4+ 9.g3 Nf3+ had appeared in a silly game, “R.F.” vs “Nibs” in the June 1899 issue of the American Chess Magazine, which had made fun of the new craze – chess by telephone! The game ended 10.Kd1 Ne7 11.e5+ Kd5 12.Qd3, but of course 11…Kc6 was better for Black, e.g. 12.Qe4+ d5 13.exd6+ Nd5 14.gh Bg4 as in the internet game abhailey –peonconorejas, 2008 (0-1,20).

9.fe+ Qxe5 10.Qf3 Nf6

10…Ne7 was seen in Jerome – Jaeger, Correspondence, 1878, when Black quickly returned a piece for a balanced game with 11.c3 Ng6 12.d4 Bxd4 13.cd Qxd4 14.Nc3 c6. He then proceeded to outplay his opponent in 68 moves 0-1.

11.d3 Kc6

This King move (attributed to B.K. Neufville) “gives Black an opportunity for a counter attack and makes an exciting contest” according to Jerome (ACJ, 4/1878).

In Jerome- Shinkman, 1874, Black instead retreated his King to e7, played …g5, …c6 and …d5, developed his pieces and at the 21^st move “Mr. Shinkman announced loss of the Queen or mate in six moves.” (DCJ, 7/1874). In Jerome – Brownson, 1875, Black retreated his King in the same manner, played …d6, and focused on exchanging pieces, although he blundered on move 40 and resigned a few moves later (DCJ, 6/1875). (Jerome hung on doggedly in an 1878 correspondence game against Pane after 11…Ke7 12.Nc3 d5, until his opponent likewise put together too many weak moves, and the gambiteer prevailed in 41 moves)

In an 1876 off-hand game against Jerome, an Amateur borrowed the King retreat and c-pawn push from Shinkman, the weak play from Pane, and the blunders from Brownson, and was checkmated in 20 moves!

12.Nc3 c6

Equally solid was 12…d6 13.Bf4 Qh5 14.Qf1 Re8 15.Ne2 Bg4 16.Ng3 Qf7 17.h3Bh5 18.Kd2 Bd4, when Jerome self-destructed and lost horribly in 34 moves, Jerome – Colburn, correspondence 1879. Modern alternatives 13.Bd2 and 14…Bb4, from two Yetman – Farmer games, did nothing to change White’s prospects.

13.h3 Qh5 14.Qg3 Be6 15.Ne2 Raf8

Black is developed, and his extra piece puts White’s King in more danger than his own, in one of the Jerome – Charles correspondence games (Brentano, 10/1881).

It is at this point that James Mortimer (Pocket-Book, 1888) suggested for Black to play instead 15…Ng4 16.Rf1 Bf2+ 17.Rxf2 Nxf2 18.Qxf2, giving up two pieces for a Rook and ending up with a lead in development, as well as the exchange for a pawn. This is not as strong as Charles’ move, and is better met by 16.d4, in any event, although Black still has the advantage. 

[to be continued]

Jerome Gambit: Triumph Over the Annoying Defense

I received a couple of Jerome Gambit games from chessfriend Vlasta Fejfar. The first involves a complicated, frustrating, and, ultimately, philosophical defense. The second is almost off-the-road adventuring.

Let's dive into the tough stuff first. After a theoretical opening "discussion" and "scientific" middle game, there follows a textbook attack and a pleasant checkmate. 

vlastous - franciscoribeiro
internet, 2017

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

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

The annoying "annoying defense" (see 1 and 2 for starters). Computers love it. Vlasta has a lot of experience facing it.

Black offers to return one of the two sacrificed pieces. Although his King appears a bit precarious, much of the dynamism in the game is drained off.

White need to go into the line with a plan - and a decision about what kind of outcome he is looking for.

8.fxe5 dxe5 9.Qh3+ Kd6 10.Qd3+ Ke7 11.Qg3 

Here the game Fejfar,V - Pressl, corr Czech Republic, 2015 was drawn.

Is a draw acceptable to White, who started the game with a Bashi-Bazouk attack, sacrificing two pieces? Is a draw acceptable to Black, who, only a few moves ago, had an "objectively" won game?

It is a typical Jerome Gambit irony that could be expressed in the idea: Both sides stand better (or worse).  

11...Kf8 

A little bit better is 11...Kf7, although Vlasta has experience with that line, too: 12.Qxe5 Bd7 (12...Bd4 13.Rf1+ Nf6 14.Qh5+ Kg8 15.Qe2 Be6 16.c3 Be5 17.g3 c5 18.d3 Qd6 19.Bf4 Bg4 20.Qe3 Bh3 21.Rf3 Bg4 22.Rf1 Re8 23.Nd2 Bxf4 24.gxf4 b5 25.e5 Nd5 26.Qg3 Qg6 27.Ne4 c4 28.Kd2 Bf5 29.Nd6 Rd8 30.dxc4 bxc4 31.Rae1 Qxg3 32.hxg3 Ne7 33.Ke3 Bd3 34.Rg1 Nf5+ 35.Nxf5 Bxf5 36.Rd1 Kf7 37.Rd4 h5 38.Rgd1 Rc8 39.Rh1 g6 40.Rh2 Ke7 41.a4 Rc6 42.Rd5 Be6 43.Rb5 Rc7 44.Rd2 h4 45.gxh4 Rxh4 46.Rd4 Rh3+ 47.Kf2 Rd3 48.a5 Rxd4 49.cxd4 Bd7 50.Rb8 Ke6 51.Ke3 Kd5 52.a6 c3 53.bxc3 Rxc3+ 54.Kf2 Bc8 55.Ra8 Rc7 56.Ke3 Rc3+ 57.Kf2 Kxd4 58.Rxa7 Ke4 59.Rg7 Kf5 60.a7 Ra3 61.Rf7+ Kg4 62.Rf8 Bb7 63.e6 Rxa7 64.e7 Bc6 65.e8=Q Bxe8 66.Rxe8 Kxf4 67.Rf8+ Kg4 68.Rc8 g5 69.Rc3 Kh4 70.Kg1 Ra2 71.Rb3 g4 draw, Fejfar,V - Goc,P) 13.Qh5+ g6 14.Qxc5 Qh4+ 15.Qf2+ Qxf2+ 16.Kxf2 Nf6 17.d3 Rhf8 18.Nc3 Kg7 19.Ke2 Bg4+ 20.Ke3 Be6 21.h3 Nh5 22.Ne2 Rae8 23.b3 Nf6 24.Ba3 Rf7 25.c4 Rd8 26.Raf1 Rfd7 27.Nf4 Bg8 28.Bb2 Rf8 29.e5 Re7 30.Kd2 Ne8 31.e6+ Black resigned, Fejfar,V - Svoboda, corr Czech Cup, 2016 

He has also seen 11...Ke8 12.Nc3 Bd4 13.Rf1 Qd7 14.Nd5 c6 15.Ne3 Nf6 16.d3 Qc7 17.c3 Bxe3 18.Bxe3 Qe7 19.O-O-O Rf8 20.Rf3 Bd7 21.Rdf1 c5 22.Bxc5 draw, Fejfar - Kyzlink, corr Czech Republic, 2015.

You may have noticed in some of these games Vlasta was testing the Jerome Gambit in correspondence play - like Alonzo Wheeler Jerome did with his gambit over a century ago. A draw is a reasonable outcome.

12.Qxe5

For comparison,  a couple of other games:

12. Rf1+ Nf6 13. Qxe5 Bd6 14. Qg5 Bxh2 15. Nc3 Be6 $2 16. e5 h6 17. Qe3 Qe7 18. exf6 gxf6 19. d3 c5 $6 20. Bd2 Rd8 21. O-O-O b6 $6 22. g3 Kg7 23. Rh1 Rd4 24. Rxh2 h5 25. Re1 Kf7 26. Rhe2 Rd6 27. Ne4 Rc6 28. Qf3 Kg6 29. Ng5 fxg5 30. Qxc6 Kh7 31. Rxe6 Black resigned, Wall,B - Shah,V, chess-db, 2015; and

12.d3 Nf6 13.Rf1 Qe7 14.Nc3 c6 15.Bg5 Kf7 16.O-O-O Rf8 17.h3 Kg8 18.Rf3 Qe6 19.Rdf1 Be7 20.Kb1 Bd7 21.Nd1 Rae8 22.Qh4 b5 23.Ne3 Qd6 24.Qf2 Be6 25.g4 c5 26.Nf5 Bxf5 27.gxf5 Nh5 28.Bc1 Nf4 29.h4 c4 30.d4 Nh5 31.d5 b4 32.Qe2 c3 33.b3 a5 34.a4 bxa3 35.Rxc3 Black resigned, Wall,B - ubluk, Chess.com, 2012.

12...Qh4+  

The alternative, 12...Bd6, was seen in a number of games in the legendary Fisher-Kirshner - KnightStalker match in 1993. When people send me Jerome Gambit games, they usually start with Amateur - Blackburne, London, 1884, and then follow with the Fisher-Kirshner - KnightStalker games.

The text is sharp and relatively unexplored. The only other game with it in The Database is the computer game WB Nimzo 2000b - La Dame Blanche 2.0c, Jerome Gambit thematic tournament, 2009 - which was a 109 move draw!

13.g3 Qe7 14.Qxe7+ Kxe7 

The game has left the path of the computers (which contained 14...Nxe7) and has transposed to 3 games played by Philidor1792 in 2012.

15.Nc3 

Alternately, d2-d3 was seen in Philidor1792 - NN, 5 0 blitz, 2012 (1-0, 30) and c2-c3 was seen in Philidor1792 - NN, 5 0 blitz, 2012 (1-0, 22) and Philidor1792 - NN, no time control, 2012 (0-1, 27).

15...c6 

Played to keep White's Knight off of d5. Probably better was 15...Nf6, but Black seems to have been nervous about a possible Bishop pin at g5 (see move 17).  

16.Na4 Bd6 17.d4 h6 18.O-O Bh3 19.Rf3 Nf6 

A puzzling move. Black gives back his extra piece and secures what should be an even position. Stockfish 8, instead, suggests castling-by-hand on the Queenside, 19...Rf8 20.Bf4 Kd8 21.Nc5 Kc8, with advantage.

It must be said that Black is employing the "scientific" idea (as he did on move 7) of accepting the sacrificed material, and then giving it back some time later.

20.e5 Bxe5 21.dxe5 Nd7 

Vlasta suggested that 21...Ng4 would have led to an even game. 

22.b3 Nxe5 

Black is in too much of a hurry to capture the pawn. It will cost him another piece.

23.Re3 Kd6 24.Ba3+ Ke6 25.Rae1 b5 26.Rxe5+ Kf6 27.Bb2 Kg6 28. Nc5 Rad8 

White is winning now - he has an advantage in material and a developing attack on the enemy King.

29.Re7 Rhg8 30.Ne6 Bxe6 31.R1xe6+ Kh7 32. Rxc6 Rd1+ 

One last Hurrah. White's pressure on g7 is deadly.

33.Kg2 Rb1 34.Bf6 a5 35.Rcc7 Kg6 36.Bxg7 Rd1 

37.Rc6+ Kg5 38.Re5+ Kg4 39.h3 checkmate

Jerome Gambit: Full Stop

I have just completed my first Jerome Gambit game in the ongoing "Italian Battleground" tournament at Chess.com (3 days / move). It was one of those not infrequent games that was very interesting - until it suddenly ended.

(For the record, it was a win for me.)

perrypawnpusher - Abhishek29
"Italian Battleground" tournament, Chess.com, 2018

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

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6

I have always been glad to see this move, as it seems to me to be based upon common sense - block the check, keep the Black King off of the back rank to facilitate castling-by-hand, remove the Knight from danger, return one of the two sacrificed pieces, and be ready to kick the White Queen with ...d6 - which suggests that the defender is figuring the opening out as he goes along, rather than having studied an ultra-sharp line to strike back with (although 6...Ng6 can still be considered one of the "refutations" of the Jerome Gambit).

I was therefore surprised to see, after checking with The Database, that out of 127 games of mine that have reached this position, I scored 79% - versus the overall 82% that I scored in 318 games with 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+.

More research with The Database led to more surprises.

Against the sharper 6...Ke6 - which usually means either that Black is unfamiliar with the Jerome Gambit and wants to hang on to every bit of his material (good for me), or that he is ultra-familiar with the Jerome, and has a nasty "surprise" in store for me (not so good) - I scored 85% in 78 games.  

Even moreso, against 6...g6 - either a reflex block by Black of the Queen check (good for me) or a segue into the Blackburne Defense (mixed; how much does my opponent know about Amateur - Blackburne, London, 1884?), where I have scored 85% in 13 games, or Whistler's Defense ("objectively" very scary), where I have scored 83% in 3 games - I have done better than average: 89% in 46 games.

The biggest trouble I have had, in terms of main Jerome Gambit opening lines, has been with 6...Kf8, where I scored only 77% in 33 games. (The Four Knights versions have given me similar trouble: the Semi-Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit has scored 78% for me in 58 games, while the Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit has scored 74%.)

Now, with a caution concerning the above - Your mileage may vary - back to my recent game.

7.Qd5+ 

The "nudge". Good enough for Alonzo Wheeler Jerome, good enough for me. White uses a move go give Black a chance to spend some time puzzling over Why?. If Black is going to castle-by-hand, he will have to give the move back, anyhow, with ...Kf7.

7...Ke8 8.Qxc5 d6 9.Qe3 Nf6 10.O-O Qe7

Black's pieces put pressure on White's center. If only he could ...0-0, his advantage would be very clear.

On the other hand, a Black Queen on the e-file, in front of her King, is a signal for White to play Nc3 (with the idea of Nd5), and to think about opening the e-file with a Rook aiming at the royal couple.

11.Nc3 Rf8

Thinking about artificial castling on the Kingside.

Another plan was seen in perrypawnpusher - Vaima01, Chess.com, 2012, which is worth showing again: 11...Be6 12.f4 Bf7 13.f5 Ne5 14.d4 Nc6 15.Qd3 Kd7 16.e5 Ne8 17.e6+ Bxe6 18.fxe6+ Kd8 19.d5 Ne5 20.Qf5 h6 21.Bf4 Rf8 22.Qh3 Rf6 23.Ne4 Rf8 24.Bxe5 dxe5 25.Qg3 Nf6 26.Qxe5 Nxe4 27.Qxe4 Qc5+ 28.Kh1 Ke7 29.Rf7+ Rxf7 30.exf7+ Kxf7 31.Qe6+ Kf8 32.Rf1+ Qf2 Black resigned.

12.f4 Ng4 

Black tucked his King away in an earlier game: 12...Kf7 13.f5 Ne5 14.d4 Neg4 15.Qe2 Kg8 16.h3 Nh6 17.Bxh6 gxh6 18.e5 dxe5 19.dxe5 Qc5+ 20.Kh1 Nd5 21.Qh5 Nxc3 22.bxc3 Qxe5 23.Rae1 Qf6 24.Re3 Bxf5 25.Ref3 Qe6 26.Rxf5 Rxf5 27.Qxf5 Qxf5 28.Rxf5 Rd8 29.Rb5 Rd2 30.Rxb7 Rxc2 31.Rxa7 Rxc3 32.a4 Rc1+ 33.Kh2 Ra1 34.Rxc7 Rxa4 35.Rd7 Ra2 36.Re7 drawn, perrypawnpusher - chingching, FICS, 2011. 

The text move illustrates the atraction of attacking White's wayward and overactive Queen. "Objectively" it is not best, as it leads to a relatively balanced game, but it reminded me of a series of unfortunate games I played against a difficult opponent (see "Nemesis") - and one particular game (see below).

13.Qg3 Nf6 

Black retreats the Knight. I wondered for a moment: What if I played 14.Qe3? Would he play 14...Ng4, agreeing that the position had leveled out? I didn't think so.

Besides, I was heartened by the gift of two tempii, especially after my recent blog post about some lines of the Jerome Gambit being one tempo away from being playable.

To mention, a few years ago I had faced two alternative ideas:

13...Bd7 14.f5 N6e5 15.d4 d5 16.Nxd5 Qd6 17.dxe5 Nxe5 18.Bf4 Qc5+ 19.Kh1 Nf7 20.Nxc7+ Ke7 21.Nxa8 Rxa8 22.Bg5+ Ke8 23.c3 Bc6 24.Rae1 h6 25.Be3 Qc4 26.Qxg7 Bxe4 27.Qg8+ Kd7 28.Qxa8 Qc6 29.Rd1+ Kc7 30.Bf4+ Kb6 31.Qg8 Black resigned, perrypawnpusher - obturator, FICS, 2012; and

13...Nxf4 14.Rxf4 Qe5 15.Rxg4 Bxg4 16.Qe3 Qf6 17.h3 Bd7 18.d4 Rf7 19.Bd2 Kf8 20.Nd5 Qd8 21.Rf1 Rxf1+ 22.Kxf1 Kg8 23.Qg3 Qf8+ 24.Kg1 c6 25.Nc3 Re8 26.Bf4 Re6 27.e5 dxe5 28.Bxe5 Rg6 29.Qe3 Qf5 30.Kh2 Qxc2 31.d5 Qxg2 checkmate, perrypawnpusher - MRBarupal, FICS, 2010. 

14.f5 Ne5 15.d4 Nc4  

I suspect my opponent considered the better move, 15...Nc6, but figured that both moves guarded against White's threat e4-e5, and his choice threatened the pawn at b2 as well. 

16.Bg5

White can play this move, anyhow, because 16...Nxb2 would be answered by 17.e5.

16...h6

Black probably needed to play something more challenging, such as 16...Nh5!? suggested by Stockfish 9 after the game. After 17.Qh4 Qf7 18.e5 White's attack in the center, towards Black's King, will be very strong - but also very complicated, giving the defender chances.

17.Bh4 Bd7 18.Nd5 

White's pieces are causing all sorts of mischief, especially the Knight on d5 (recall the note to move 10!) After 18...Qf7 19.Nxc7+ Kd8 20.Nxa8 Kc8 21.Bxf6 gxf6 22.b3 White will be the exchange and 3 pawns ahead. There is too much going on for Black to count on trying to balance things a bit more by grabbing the Knight on a8.

In fact, Black focuses on the upcoming Knight fork at c7, overlooking the Knight's greater threat.

18...Kd8 19.Nxe7 Black resigned

Ouch. Perhaps this is the result of the outside world intruding, providing more important things to think about than defending against the Worst Chess Opening Ever.