Jerome Gambit and Vlad Tepes...

The GameKnot website has always been a good place to find Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) games.

The Vlad-Tepes Mini-Tournament, a double round robin Jerome Gambit rumble, is almost done. It looks like Vlad-Tepes himself will be the top scorer.

The Jerome Gambit has been scoring a bit above 40%, as expected.

Today and tomorrow will feature a couple of interesting games. My apologies to splott, who turns up on the losing side of both encounters. They are not representative of his play – he likely will place third in the tournament.

vlad-tepes - splott
www.GameKnot.com
Vlad-Tepes Mini-Tournament, 2008

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Kf8



This is a reasonable defense, first mentioned by Alonzo Wheeler Jerome in his premier analysis in the March 1874 issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal; and first played, as far as I can tell, by William Carrington in the 9th game of his second match with Mexican Champion Andres Clemente Vazquez, two years later.

6.Qh5


The Banks Variation, named for Pete Banks ("blackburne"), modern Jerome Gambit aficianado and member of the Jerome Gambit Gemeinde.

"Yes, it is always nice to threaten checkmate after just six moves" wrote International Master Gary Lane in annotating the game Banks - Rees, Halesowen, 2003, for his "Opening Lanes" column at ChessCafe (see "International Master Gary Lane").

The move 6.Qh5 was mentioned by Brownson in the March 1875 Dubuque Chess Journal, approved by Hallock in the February 1877 American Chess Journal ("Q-KR5 looks promising"), an apparently played by the opening's creator ("The continuation adopted by Jerome") – although I have no record of any of his games with the Queen move played at move 6 .

An alternative move for White would be 6.0-0 Nxe5 7.d4 Bxd4 8.Qxd4 d6 9.f4 Nc6 10.Qd3 Be6 11.e5 Bf7 0-1 as in easy19 - 1dumb, www.GameKnot.com, 2008

Jerome recommended instead that White trade off the advanced Knight, to disrupt Black's pawn structure: 6.Nxc6



6...dxc6 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Qf3 Qd4 9.d3 Bg4 10.Qg3 Bb6 11.e5 Nh5 12.Qh4 Be2 "It seems impossible to prevent the threatened loss of a piece, and no wiser course for Black is apparent from this point than the one chosen. The position is singular, and it is curious that White in so constrained a position should be enabled to regain his lost piece" wrote Brownson in the March 1875 Dubuque Chess Journal. 13.Qxd4 Bxd4 14.Re1 Bxe5 15.Rxe2 Re8 16.g3 Kf7 17.f4 Bd4+ 18.Kf1 Nf6 19.Nd2 Rxe2 20.Kxe2 Re8+ 21.Ne4 a5 22.Kf3 h6 23.c3 Ba7 24.Be3 Bxe3 25.Kxe3 Ng4+ 26.Kf3 Nxh2+ 27.Kg2 Ng4 28.Re1 b6 29.a4 Rd8 drawn by agreement, Jerome - Brownson, Iowa 1875

6...Qf6

Or 6...Nxe5 7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qf4+ Qf6 9.Qxf6+ Nxf6 10.d3 Kf7 11.Nc3 Bd7 12.0-0 Rhf8 13.Bg5 Ng4 14.Nd5 Kg8 15.Nxc7 Rac8 16.Nd5 Bxf2+ 17.Rxf2 Kh8 18.Rf4 Rxf4 19.Bxf4 Rxc2 20.Bxd6 a6 21.Rf1 h6 22.h3 Rc6 23.Bf8 Kh7 24.hxg4 Bxg4 25.Rf7 Rg6 26.Rxb7 1-0 blackburne-hollandia, www.ChessWorld.net, 2004

7.Nxd7+ Bxd7 8.Qxc5+


"White now has three pawns for the piece. This is reasonable considering that White has played the Jerome Gambit" – IM Lane.

8...Nge7

International Master Lane wrote about the alternative, 8...Qd6 "Black is probably worried about his exposed king, so offers to exchange Queens. I prefer 8...Nge7, when Black relies on his greater piece activity top maintain the advantage" 9.Qxd6+ cxd6 10.c3 Nf6 11.f3 Kf7 12.0-0 Rhe8 13.d4 Kg8 14.Bf4 d5 15.e5 Nh5 16.Bg5 Nxe5 17.dxe5 Rxe5 18.Bc1 Bb5 19.Rd1 Rae8 20.Bd2 Re2 21.Na3 Bd3 22.Re1 Nf4 23.Rxe2 Nxe2+ 24.Kf2 Rf8 25.b4 Nf4 26.Bxf4 Rxf4 27.Ke3 Rh4 28.Kxd3 Rxh2 29.Rg1 Kf7 30.Nb5 Rh6 31.Re1 a6 32.Nd4 g6 33.a4 Rh2 34.g4 Ra2 35.a5 Ra3 36.Re5 Ra2 37.Rxd5 Rh2 38.Rd7+ Kf6 39.Rxb7 h5 40.gxh5 gxh5 41.Rb6+ Kg5 42.Rxa6 h4 43.Ne6+ Kf5 44.Ke3 Rc2 45.Nd4+ 1-0 Banks - Rees, Halesowen v Lucas BS 2003

9.Nc3 Qg6

Another Banks/blackburne game continued instead: 9...Kf7 10.d3 Rhf8 11.0-0 Kg8 12.f4 Qd4+ 13.Qxd4 Nxd4 14.Rf2 b5 15.Be3 b4 16.Ne2? Nxc2 17.Rc1 Nxe3 18.Rxc7 Rad8 19.Rf3 Nd1 20.b3 Ng6 21.Kf1 Bg4 22.Rg3 Bxe2+ 23.Kxe2 Nc3+ 24.Ke3 Rc8 25.Rb7 a5 26.f5 Rb8 27.Ra7 Ra8 28.Rb7 Rfb8 29.Rc7 Nb5 30.Rd7 Ra7? 31.Rxa7 Nxa7 32.fxg6 Nc6 33.gxh7+ Kh8 34.Rh3 Rd8 35.g4 Ne5 36.d4 Nxg4+ 37.Kd3 Nf2+ 0-1 blackburne - Rail2Rail, JG2 thematic www.chessworld.net 2008.

10.g3 Bg4 11.f4 Bf3 12.f5 Qg4 13.0-0 Bxe4


In a relatively even game Black overlooks a tactic. He should probably have looked into the idea of using his Rook at h8 to attack the White King, by advancing the h-pawn to attack the one at g3.

14.Rf4 Qh5 15.Nxe4 Qd1+


Black's game continues to falter, and soon Vlad-Tepes is swooping in for the kill.

16.Rf1 Qe2 17.d3 Rd8 18.f6




18...gxf6 19.Bh6+ Ke8 20.Nxf6+ Kf7 21.Ng4+ Ke8 22.Qh5+ 1-0






Oh, my aching neck!

Jerome Gambit Tournament: Chapter IX

Having shown blackburne Whistler's Defense as one of my own plans for meeting the Jerome Gambit – see "Jerome Gambit Tournament: Chapter VIII" – I was very interested in what he had prepared for me.

perrypawnpusher - blackburne
JG3 thematic
http://www.chessworld.net/, 2008
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 7.Qd5+ Ke8 8.Qxc5 d6


For 8...c6 see perrypawnpusher - Gary_Seven, "Jerome Gambit Tournament: Chapter VII".

9.Qe3
Jerome - Brownson, Iowa 1875 continued: 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 1–0
9...Nf6 10.f4

10.d4 was seen in the correspondence game Charlick - Mann, Australia 1881 which will be detailed in a later post.

10...Rf8 TN 11.0–0 Kd7


Wow! I had expected something like 11...Kf7 followed by 12...Kg8

12.Nc3 b6 13.d4 c6
Provocative – but Black does have the extra piece. I can get my pawns moving, but my opponent always has the option of returning a Knight or Bishop for 2 or 3 of them, if need be.
14.f5 Ne7 15.e5 dxe5 16.dxe5 Nfd5 17.e6+
So far the pawns are just annoying little mosquitoes that can be swatted away.

17...Kc7
After the game I was shocked to see that Rybka considered 17...Ke8 to be a safer move for the Black King. Certainly that looks more like "the kind of move a computer would make" than the choice of a human being.
18.Qe5+ Kb7 19.Qxg7


The "mosquitoes" are beginning to look threatening, but Black has the draw well in hand: 19...Bxe6 20.fxe6 Rxf1+ 21.Kxf1 Nxc3 22.bxc3 Qd1+ 23.Kf2 Qxc2+, forcing repetition.

This is not surprising, as White is attacking with only one piece – and Black has castled by hand.
19...Nf6
This perfectly reasonable-looking move ("restrain, blockade, destroy" anyone?) allows White time to develop his Bishop, and suddenly Black's game is tumbling downhill.
20.Bg5 Nfg8 21.f6
This is all good fun, but stronger was more development: 21.Rad1

21...Qd4+ 22.Kh1 Rxf6
Looks like a miscalculation.
23.Bxf6 Nxf6 24.Qxe7+ Nd7 25.exd7 Qxd7 26.Qxd7+ Bxd7


The smoke has cleared, and White is a Rook and a pawn up. My chessfriend blackburne knows me well enough to hang around for a convenient blunder on my part, but this day I disappoint him.
27.Rf7 Kc7 28.Rd1 Rd8 29.Ne4 Kc8 30.Nf6 Be6 31.Rxd8+ Kxd8 32.Rxa7 Bf5 33.Nxh7 Bxc2 34.h4 Ke8 35.h5 Bxh7 36.Rxh7 Kf8 37.h6 Kg8 38.Rb7 1–0

Rail2Rail Nails It

As predicted, Rail2Rail has won his double round robin Jerome Gambit tournament at ChessWorld.

He was followed by dandoo, who lost a vital step on the leader by dropping a game on time to tailender calchess10.

On the other hand, the runner-up played a snappy game that helped distance himself from the middle of the pack:

dandoo - Piratepaul
JG2 thematic www.chessworld.net, 2008
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.d4 exd4 6.Ng5+ Kg6 7.h4 d6 8.h5+ Kf6 9.Qf3+ Ke5 10.Nf7+ 1–0

"Stay alert!" would be a good title for the following game, won by the third place finisher.


blackburne - eddie43
JG2 thematic www.chessworld.net, 2008

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 Bd4



A novel way to return a piece with hopes of breaking the attack, although it turns out to be more of a "TL" than "TN".

8.fxe5 Bxe5 9.Qf5+ Kd6 10.0–0

White, in turn, takes the position a bit too casually. With 10.d4 he could have shown an advantage in the game. Instead, he "castles into it."

10...Qh4

Stronger was 10...Qf6. Even so, Black is now clearly better.

11.h3 Qg3 12.Rf2 Nf6

Black looks like he has a killer position, and he would have, if his Knight had gone to either e7 or h6 instead. As it is, he gives White a chance.

13.d4 Bxd4 14.Bf4+ Kc6 15.Bxg3 Bxf2+ 16.Bxf2 d6

The smoke has cleared, and White has the winning advantage of a Queen for a Rook.

17.Qa5 Nxe4 18.Qa4+ Kd5 19.Nc3+ Nxc3 20.bxc3 Ke6 21.Re1+ Kf6 22.Qf4+ Kg6 23.Re3 Bf5 24.Rg3+ Kf6 25.Bd4+ Ke6 26.Re3+ Kd7 27.Qxf5+ Kd8 28.Bxg7 Rg8 29.Bf6 checkmate

The Salvio Gambit?? [more]

Searching for the link between the 17th century Italian chess player Salvio and the Jerome Gambit – 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ – I had come upon J.H. Sarratt's translation of Salvio's works... see "The Salvio Gambit??"

Salvio presented a number of "games" in the Giuoco Piano section of his book, in five of which the first player sacrificed his Bishop for the pawn on his opponent's King Bishop Two square [f7/e7]. For the most part I have translated the descriptive notation to algebraic notation.

In this first game, Black moves first:

1.e5 e4 2.Bc5 Bc4 3.Nf6 Nc3 4.0-0 [Note: this is the early Italian form of castling, where the player has choices of where his King and Rook will go – in this case, the King goes to g8 and the Rook to e8.] Nf3 5.c6 Ng5 6.d5 exd5 7.Bxf2+


7...Kxf2 8.Ng4+ Kg1 9.Qxg5 d3 10.Qh4 Qe2

Wrote Sarratt "There is no advantage on either side, says SALVIO. It appears to me to be slightly in favor of the Black."

In the second game, and all subsequent games presented here, White moves first; and the pattern of play is familiar:

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.0-0 [King to g1, Rook to e1] Nf6 5.c3 Ng4 6.d4 exd4 7.cxd4

Salvio's note:

White at the seventh move, instead of taking K.P. with Q. B. P. [7.cxd4], may take K. B. P. with his K.B., giving check [7.Bxf7+];

and if Black take that Bishop [7...Kxf7], White ought to check with his K. Kt. on the adversary's K. Kt. fourth square [8.Ng5+], and afterwards take K. Kt. with his Queen [9.Qxg4]. If Black should decline taking K.B., and, instead of it, should move his K. to his B. square [7...Kf8], White must move his Q. B. to adversary's K. Kt. fourth square [8.Bg5].

In the third game the Bishop sacrifice comes earlier:

1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Qe2 Nf6 4.Bxf7+


4...Kxf7 5.Qc4+ d5 6.Qxc5 Nxe4 7.Qe3 Nf6

"The Black has a very good game" notes Salvio.


The fourth game is similar:

1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Qe2 Nc6 4.Bxf7+



4...Kxf7 5.Qc4+ Ke8 Qxc5 "and wins a Pawn."

The last game:

1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.c3 c6

"This is a highly exceptionable move;" wrote Sarratt, "instead of it the Queen ought to be moved to her K. second square. [3...Qe7]"

4.Qe2

Then another note by Sarratt "Salvio has not directed the White to avail himself of his adversary's error: White may play much better, ex. gr. 4.d4 exd4 5.Bxf7+



5...Kxf7 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxc5

and white has a much better game."

It is clear that Salvio – and Sarratt – liked to sacrifice a Bishop at f7/f2. Perhaps that is what the Chess.com posters or Golombek had in mind when they linked Salvio with the Jerome Gambit.

However, nowhere in Salvio's Trattato does a Bishop sacrifice at f7/f2 occur after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5.

I guess I'd better search for more Golombek books!

The Salvio Gambit??

I was visiting Chess.com the other day, and noticed in the Forum section that one poster had mentioned the Salvio Gambit: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+.

Another poster had chimed in:

The "Salvio Gambit" is more commonly known as the Jerome Gambit, is most likely better than the Chicago [1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nxe5 Nxe5] and the Halloween or Leipzig Gambit (In the 4 Knights) [1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.Nxe5 Nxe5]. White only ends up losing 1 pawn, and Black's king is very uncomfortable, and Black can get blown off the board if he fails to proceed in an accurate manner.

Of course, I was flabbergasted.

Didn't Salvio live two centuries before Alonzo Wheeler Jerome? This was like finding paintings of the Jerome Gambit on a cave wall!

I sent an inquiry to both posters, and soon received a response from one of them who had seen the 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ line with the name "Salvio Gambit" in an old book by Golombek. He didn't mention the title.

Unfortunately – for my research – according to Harry Golombek's obituary in The New York Times, he wrote 38 books.

The poster also noted "In this case, the Jerome Gambit, is completely unsound, and only can work against weak players" – which I found reassuring.

I slipped off to the library where I also discovered Golombek's Encyclopedia of Chess (1977) which had this entry

Salvio, Alessandro (1570 – 1640) The dates of Salvio's birth and death are approximate. It is known that he was in his middle twenties when he defeated Paolo Boi who was by then already an old man. He and the Calabrian, Greco, were the chief theorists and writers on chess in Italy in the early seventeenth century. In this they differed markedly from their predecessors, Leonardo and Boi, who were practicing players but committed nothing to paper.

Salvio wrote three work: a treatise on the game, Trattato dell'inventione et arte liberale del gioco degli scacchi, published in Naples in 1604 and dedicated to his patron, Fulvio di Costanzo, Marquis of Corleto; a curious trajedy in verse on chess La Scaccaide, 1612; and in 1634 a life of Leonardo, Il Puttino, altramente detto il cavaliere errante, to which he attached his Trattoto.

Salvio made Naples the Italian centre for chess and he also created a "chess academy" that used to meet regulalrly in the house of another chess enthusiast, Judge Rovito.

As a player he was noted for his resource and brilliancy. As a writer he was largely responsible for the popularity of some variations of the King's Gambit, one of which was to be known later as the Muzio and another that bore his name, the Salvio Gambit (1.P-K4, P-K4; 2.P-KB4, PxP; 3.N-KB3, P-KN4; 4.B-B4, P-N5; 5.N-K5). these lines he owed to his predecessors but it was his analyses and his writing that popularized them.

Feeling lucky, I went to Google Books and did a search on "Salvio", only to discover a massive title:

The Works of Damiano, Ruy-Lopez and Salvio, on the Game of Chess;Translated and Arranged: with Remarks, Observations and Copious Notes on the Games. Containing, also, Several Original Games and Situations, by the Editor, To Which Are Added The Elements of the Art of Playing without seeing the Board. By J. H. Sarratt, 1813

Fantastic!

I quickly found the section I was looking for:

AN OPENING, Denominated by SALVIO, and by all Italian Players, Giuoco Piano; that Name being given to all Openings in which no Pawn is sacrificed for the sake of an attacking position, and in which the K. Kt. and the K. B. are played immediately after the K. Pawn.

Now we were getting somewhere!

Jerome Gambit Tournament: Chapter VIII

Pete Banks ("blackburne") is a chessfriend, and we are both Jerome Gambit enthusiasts, but in our ChessWorld tournament game, I had to finish off both him and the Gambit.

blackburne - perrypawnpusher
JG3 thematic, www.chessworld.net, 2008

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 Qe7


Whistler's defense, perhaps Black's best in the Jerome Gambit, as touched upon in "Flaws (Part II)" and "Beware: Mad Dog!"

Taking the Rook now is fatal.

8.Qxh8 Qxe4+ 9.Kd1 Qxg2 10.Qxh7+ Kf8 11.Re1 d5 12.d4


White needed to move his c-pawn to make an escape hatch for his King, and to meet that goal 12.c4 was a bit better than 12.c3, in that his Knight could subsequently get to c3. Even so, when the smoke cleared Black would be up a piece with the initiative and the safer King.

With the text comes checkmate.

12...Bg4+ 13.Kd2 Qxf2+ 14.Re2 Qxe2+

This is fine, although purists will point out that I missed a quicker mate: 14...Bb4+ 15.Nc3 Qxe2#

15.Kc3 Qc4+ 16.Kd2 Qxd4+ 17.Ke1 Qd1 checkmate

I felt fortunate that the rest of my games in this tournament were far enough along that none of my opponents observed this game and played Whistler's defense against me. In fact, I was quite surprised that no one else played the defense at all!

Pass the aspirin, please!

NN - Brunhold
Kempten, 1988
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qg3 Qf6 9.0–0 Be6 10.c3 h5 11.d4 h4 12.Qd3 Bb6 13.Be3 h3 14.g3 Qf3 0–1

psittacosis - Gandalf
HCL B652 www.playchess.de, 2001
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.d4 exd4 6.Ng5+ Kf8 7.Qf3+ Nf6 8.0–0 d5 9.exd5 Qxd5 10.Nd2 Qxg5 11.Nc4 Qd5 12.Qxd5 Nxd5 0–1

cnselway - boycey
net-chess.com, 2001
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nc6 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.d3 d5 6.c3 dxe4 7.Nxe5+ Nxe5 8.Bg5 Nxd3+ 9.Kf1 Qd5 10.Bf4 Qc5 11.h3 Qxf2# 0–1

gjr - gstevenson
net-chess.com, 2001
1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Bxf7+ Kxf7 4.Qh5+ g6 5.Qxe5 Na6 6.Qf4+ Qf6 7.Qg4 Qxf2+ 8.Kd1 Qf1# Checkmate 0–1

The Toffeeman - quag
www.ChessWorld.net , 2003
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.0–0 d6 6.d3 Nf6 7.Ng5+ Ke7 8.Nc3 Bg4 9.Qd2 Nd4 10.f3 Nxf3+ 0–1

kskcolle - mandoze
www.GameKnot.com, 2004
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Kg8 6.Qh5 Qe7 7.0–0 g6 8.Nxg6 hxg6 9.Qxg6+ Bg7 10.d3 Nc5 11.Bg5 Qe6 0–1

grobnic - obviously
www.GameKnot.com, 2004
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 Qe7 8.Qxh8 Qxe4+ 9.Kf1 Nf6 10.Nc3 Qxc2 11.h4 b6 12.Qd8 Ba6+ 0–1

steelydan - raes
www.GameKnot.com, 2004
1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 7.Qxc5 d6 8.Qd5+ Be6 9.Qxb7 Nf6 10.d3 Re8 11.f4 Bd5 12.Qb4 Bxe4 13.dxe4 Rxe4+ 0–1

Nestor250168 - Ratscales
www.chessworld.net, 2007
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 Nf6 8.Qxc5 Re8 9.Qd4 Rxe4+ 0–1

ale_xim - pascaline007
www.GameKnot.com, 2007
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Kf8 7.Qxe5 Qe7 8.Qf5+ Nf6 9.d3 d5 10.Qf3 dxe4 11.dxe4 Bg4 12.Qd3 Rd8 13.Qc4 0–1

graphic by Jeff Bucchino, "The Wizard of Draws"