Sac a pawn, or a piece, or a...

Why, oh why, do people play such a scary thing as the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+)?

I play the opening myself, and I still ask that question. I found one kind of answer in a recent Chess Cafe book review by Steve Goldberg. He was writing about Timothy Taylor's new Pawn Sacrifice! (Everyman Chess, 2008)

Of course, in the Jerome Gambit White sacrifices more than a pawn, but often his two-pawns-for-a-piece material disadvantage is on the same level of loss.

Chapter 12, titled "Confusion," represents an interesting use of pawn sacrifices. Taylor explains, "Sometimes your opponent is just too smug. You look across the board, and there he is, wearing his Andy Warhol t-shirt, dreamily calm in the midst of his prepared variation/middlegame he’s crushed GMs with/grinding ending, and he just knows he’s going to win, and you’re just going to have to sit there and suffer, and he’s going to enjoy it."

Taylor’s advice is to "rip the gauzy comfort zone right off his smiling face! What do you do? You sacrifice a pawn for no other reason than to confuse your opponent! He says to himself, ‘That can’t be good!’ Then he thinks: ‘But why did he do it? – there must be some idea!’ Then, ‘I can refute this, but I have to leave my beloved comfort zone! Ohhhhh no!’"

Five games are presented in this chapter, and four of these "go from objectively lost, to confused, to winning." Fritz doesn’t approve any of these sacrifices, but Taylor states, "The confusion sacrifice is a very effective weapon against humans … The next time you have a bad position, or a position you simply don’t like, cheer yourself up! Sac a pawn just for confusion, then watch your opponent flounder! You will win many more games this way than if you drearily and unhappily defend."

More Jerome-izing

As we've seen in "King of Bxf7" there are many way's to Jerome-ize an opening. Here are a couple more, the first coming not too long after Alonzo Wheeler Jerome presented the world with his Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) analysis.

First, a Petroff Defense, from Schachzeitung, December 1874

R.W. - H.
Leipzig, 1874

"Curiosum Kurzlich im Leipzig gespielt"

1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nxe4 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Kg8 6.Qe2 d6 7.Qxe4 dxe5 8.Qc4+ "und Weiss setzt mat"

Next, a Bishop's Opening, Berlin Defense,

magilla - rkgoss

net-chess.com 2001

1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Nh3 Nxe4 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Qh5+ Kg8 6.Qxe5 Nd6 7.0-0 Nf7 8.Qd5 c6 9.Qb3 d5 10.c4 dxc4 11.Qxc4 Bxh3 12.gxh3 Qg5+ 13.Kh1 Qd5+ 14.Qxd5 cxd5 15.Nc3 h6 16.Nxd5 Na6 17.Rg1 Bc5 18.b3 Rd8 19.Nf6+ Kf8 20.Bb2 Rxd2 21.Nd7+ Rxd7 22.Bxg7+ Kg8 23.Bxh8+ Kxh8 24.Rae1 Bxf2 25.Re8+ Kh7 26.Rf1 Bb6 27.h4 Nc7 28.Rf8 Ne5 29.Rb8 Nb5 30.Rff8 Rd1+ 31.Kg2 Rd2+ 32.Kg3 Bf2+ 33.Rxf2 Rd7 34.Rbf8 Rd3+ 35.Kg2 Rd7 36.h5 Nc3 37.R2f5 Rd2+ 38.Kg3 Ne2+ 39.Kh4 Rd4+ 40.Kh3 Ng1+ 41.Kg2 Rg4+ 42.Kf2 Nh3+ 43.Ke3 Nd7 44.R5f7+ Rg7 45.Rf3 Re7+ 46.Kd4 Ng5 47.Re3 Rxe3 48.Kxe3 Nxf8 49.Kd4 Kg7 50.Kc5 Kf7 51.Kd6 Nge6 52.a4 Ke8 53.b4 Kd8 54.b5 Nf4 55.a5 Nxh5 56.a6 Kc8 57.Kc5 Nf6 58.b6 N6d7+ 59.Kb5 Nxb6 60.h3 bxa6+ 61.Kxa6 Kb8 62.Kb5 Ne6 63.Kc6 White resigned

Jerome Gambit: Computer vs Computer

Wanting to test my conviction that the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) could be used as a way for a stronger player go give odds to a weaker player, I set up a 4-game blitz match (4 minutes, 2 second increment) on my computer between Fritz8 and Fritz5, with the stronger program playing White each game.

The result was initially quite surprising: Fritz8 / White / the Jerome Gambit won three games, and lost one.

A closer examination revealed, however, that Games 1, 3 and 4 – White's wins – were identical, with Fritz5 / Black resigning at move 29 each time. Fritz8 had varied at move 13 in the second game and had gone on to lose.

So, it was more like Fritz5 played it's "older brother" even in defending against the Jerome Gambit, winning one unique game and losing one unique game. On the other hand, Fritz8 bettered the 40% - 45% score we've seen White achieve in recent Jerome Gambit thematic tournaments.

Further research is certainly needed!

Fritz 8 - Fritz 5.32, Blitz, 4+2, 2008: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 Qf6 8.Rf1 g6 9.Qh3+ Ke7 10.Nc3 c6 11.fxe5 Qxe5 12.Qf3 Nf6 13.d3 Bb4 14.Bd2 d6 15.d4 Qe6 16.0-0-0 Ng4 17.d5 Qg8 18.Qg3 Ke8 19.dxc6 bxc6 20.Nb5 cxb5 21.Bxb4 Ne5 22.Rxd6 Nc4 23.Qg5 Nxd6 24.Qe5+ Qe6 25.Qxh8+ Kd7 26.Rd1 h5 27.Rxd6+ Qxd6 28.Bxd6 Kxd6 29.Qd8+ 1-0

Fritz 8 - Fritz 5.32, Blitz, 4+2, 2008: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 Qf6 8.Rf1 g6 9.Qh3+ Ke7 10.Nc3 c6 11.fxe5 Qxe5 12.Qf3 Nf6 13.Ne2 Rf8 14.d4 Bxd4 15.Bf4 Qc5 16.0-0-0 Be5 17.b4 Bxf4+ 18.Qxf4 Qxb4 19.Qe5+ Kd8 20.Rxf6 Re8 21.Re6 Rxe6 22.Qxe6 Qf8 23.Qe5 Qe7 24.Qd4 b6 25.e5 Bb7 26.Nc3 c5 27.Qg4 Bc6 28.Qf4 h5 29.Nd5 Bxd5 30.Rxd5 Rc8 31.Qa4 Rc7 32.Qe4 Rc6 33.Qa4 Qe6 34.c4 Rc7 35.Qd1 a6 36.Qe2 Rc6 37.g3 b5 38.h4 bxc4 39.Qxc4 Qf7 40.Qb3 Kc7 41.Qd3 Kc8 42.Rd6 Rxd6 43.Qxd6 Qf1+ 44.Kd2 Qg2+ 45.Kc1 Qc6 46.Qd2 Kc7 47.Qa5+ Kb7 48.Qd2 Qe6 49.Qb2+ Kc6 50.Qg2+ Kb5 51.Qb7+ Ka5 52.Qc7+ Kb4 53.Qb7+ Kc3 54.Qb2+ Kd3 55.Qc2+ Kd4 56.Qb2+ Kd5 57.a3 Qg4 58.Qb7+ Kxe5 59.Qc7+ d6 60.Qe7+ Kd5 61.Qb7+ Ke6 62.Qb3+ Ke5 63.Qb2+ Qd4 64.Qe2+ Kd5 65.Qg2+ Qe4 66.Qd2+ Ke5 67.Qb2+ Kf5 68.Qb8 Qd3 69.Qc8+ Ke5 70.a4 Qc4+ 71.Kd2 Qxa4 72.Qc7 Qd4+ 73.Ke2 Qe4+ 74.Kf2 Qd3 75.Qe7+ Kd5 76.Qe8 Qf5+ 77.Kg1 Kd4 78.Qb8 Ke3 79.Qb3+ Qd3 80.Qf7 Kd2 81.Qa2+ Ke1 82.Qa5+ Qd2 83.Qa1+ Qd1 84.Qc3+ Ke2+ 85.Kh2 Qd4 86.Qa3 Qf2+ 0-1

100 Posts - What more to say?

Huddersfield College Magazine
July 1879

"Review of Mr. Gossip's Book" Theory of the Chess Openings
(1879)

...The Jerome Gambit

We do not well know why this opening (a branch of the "Giuoco") is styled a gambit, as it consists in White sacrificing a piece on the fourth move, and Staunton in his Handbook defines a gambit as a sacrifice of a Pawn.The Americans recognize the force of this by styling the opening "Jerome's double opening," although we don't quite see the meaning of this. How "double"? We think that the simple and natural definition of Jerome's Attack - as Cochrane's attack in the "Petroff" where a piece is also given up by White on his fourth move - would suffice.Like all presents of a piece early in the opening, the party so venturesome comes to early disaster. Mr. Gossip was right, therefore, in not devoting too much space to a debut which he could not establish as sound...

[Gossip replied next month, August 1879, but said nothing about the Jerome]


...............................

Cincinnatti Commercial Gazette
March 13, 1880

"Review 6th Edition German Handbook"

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.

...............................

Cincinnati Commercial Gazette

November 29, 1884

"Chess and Checkers"
"The Jerome Gambit"

Chess Editor Commercial Gazette
I notice in your chess column of to-day a review (copied from The New Orleans Times Democrat) of some analyses published in the American Supplement to Cook's Synopsis including my own analysis of the Jerome Gambit...The principal portion of the analysis is based on a number of correspondence games played between Mr. Jerome and myself, with some few compilations from other sources, including the above-mentioned. The result led me to regard the sacrifice of the Bishop as unsound, but that Black may easily err in his defense and lose...

Very respectfully,
S. A. Charles

...............................

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, Editorial Staff of the Cincinnati Commercial Gazette

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.

...............................

The Pittsburgh Chronicle-Telegraph

October 29, 1884

Our readers will perhaps remember that about two years ago we published an analysis of the Jerome Gambit which was furnished by its author. The following is from the New Orleans Times-Democrat, in an extended review of the American Edition of Cook's Synopsis. The "brilliant but unsound" (why, may we ask, is this antithesis so common that one would almost infer it to be necessary?) Jerome Gambit, invented by Mr. Jerome, of Paxton, Ill., about a decade ago, constitutes the next of the Americana, and concerning the analysis given by Mr. S. A. Charles we can only venture to say that it seems to combine much careful original work with variations compiled from such investigations as have been published upon this hazardous attack...

...............................

Pittsburgh Chronicle-Telegraph

February 27, 1884

In Cincinnati we met a number of players in the Mercantile Library, the chess room of which... We also had the pleasure of contesting several games with Mr. Jerome, of Paxton, Ill. He is well known as the author of the so-called Jerome Gambit, in which white sacrifices the Bishop by taking KBP on the fourth move of the Giuoco Piano game. Neither the gambit nor its author proved strong in the contest.

The Jerome Gambit Gemeinde (modern)

I start the "modern" era of the Jerome Gambit Gemeinde somewhat arbitrarily, taking note of the contribution of L. Elliott Fletcher, whose quite enjoyable Gambits Accepted, a survey of opening sacrifices (1954) contains an interesting Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) game. Alas, the players are listed as anonymous, and the location and date are not given.

Invented by an American named Jerome in the latter part of the nineteenth century much of the analysis given below was originated by another American, S. A. Charles, and subsequently revised by Freeborough and Ranken. The opening is frankly unsound but Black's task is by no means easy and he can quite likely go wrong...

Micah Fisher-Kirshner (see"A Few Words With... Micah Fisher-Kirshner") certainly deserves membership, for defending the honor of the Jerome Gambit against an early chess program, Knight Stalker (aka Fritz1) in a 1993 match.Certainly Master Jack Young ("Bozo" of "Bozo's Chess Emporium") should have his enthusiasm for the Jerome Gambit in his "Meet Jerome" article in Randspringer #6, 1990-1991 rewarded with membership.

Although FIDE Master Eric Schiller might shrug off the honor, he deserves a place in the Gemeinde for writing about the Jerome Gambit during a time when few even thought or knew about it, let alone analyzed it or shared their assessments. Unorthodox Chess Openings (1998, 2002), Gambit Chess Openings (2002), and Survive and Beat Annoying Chess Openings (2003) have new analysis, although the author's attitude was less tongue-in-cheek than thumb-in-eye

This is another cyberspace gambit. Virtually no attention was paid to this reckless move [4.Bxf7+] until its supporters started talking about it on the Internet. It can't be found in recent tournament games, and there is a good reason: It stinks. White whips up a brief attack, easily parried, and then spends a long time trying to justify the sacrifice. A popular gambit in cyberspace, but in the real world, it only succeeds in games where Black is a very weak player.

It is important to include Tim McGrew (see "A Few Words With... Tim McGrew") author of "The Gambit Cartel" series of articles at ChessCafe, and explorer of some of the vicissitudes of the Jerome Gambit.

The Gemeinde likewise has membership for Life Master Brian Wall, who has a 100% record with the Jerome Gambit (at least after one game) and who has presented devestating analysis of the Whistler Defense (see "Jerome Gambit Tournament: Chapter VIII") – one of the best refutations of the Jerome Gambit to date.

It's not every day (month, year, decade, century...) that an International Master mentions or makes a suggestion concerning the play of the Jerome Gambit, and because he has, IM Gary Lane (see "International Master Gary Lane") has a place in the Gemeinde; although this is not likely to be mentioned on the FIDE website.

There also are a number of players who deserve mention for their brave commitment to playing the Jerome Gambit, starting with Pete Banks ("blackburne"), whose game GM Lane analyzed in one of his "Opening Lanes" columns at ChessCafe.

Of note also are Louis Morin, whose name should have been mentioned here much earlier for his Jerome Gambit swash-buckling, and A.B. Hailey, who has produced his share of theoretical games.

Gary Gifford, current editor and publisher of the Unorthodox Openings Newsletter (and co-author of the brand new and exciting Winning with the Krazy Kat and Old Hippo) – see "But - Is this stuff playable??" – has been supportive of Jerome Gambit discoveries.

Finally, there are the many players who have ventured Jerome's Double Opening. It is not possible to mention all, but certainly those who have played in the five thematic Jerome Gambit tournaments mentioned on this blog should be welcomed into the Gemeinde: bobbob78, brain50, braken, breaker, calchess10, Capt.Mandrake, Carlos Azcarate, casker, dandoo, delboy138, drewbear, eddie43, Gary_Seven, gobo, hogmaster, HPotter, jelgava, jemasc, Kevin the fruitbat, koloman, mediax, mika76, panga74, Piratepaul, queen st, Rail2Rail, Sir Osis of the Liver, splott, Temmo, TJay2465, tonik, TWODOGS, vlad-tepes, willitfw and yorkypuddn.

The Jerome Gambit Gemeinde (early)

Followers of Emil J. Diemer and the Blackmar Diemer Gambit (1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6) composed a community they referred to as the Blackmar Diemer Gemeinde.

It only seems fitting to outline such a community for those associated with the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+).

Among the early members would of course be Alonzo Wheeler Jerome (1834-1902), credited with inventing the gambit, exploring it in over-the-board and correspondence play, and discussing it in the pages of the Dubuque Chess Journal and American Chess Journal.

Orestes A. Brownson, editor of the Dubuque Chess Journal, deserves membership in the Gemeinde, as he was enthusiastic about the Jerome Gambit, and from 1874 to 1876 published games played by Jerome and others.

William Hallock, editor of the American Chess Journal, was skeptical about the merits of the Jerome Gambit, referring to it at one point as "Jerome's Absurdity," but he carried on a discussion of the opening with Alonzo Jerome in the pages of the ACJ during the years 1876 and 1877. He can be considered part of the "loyal opposition" in the Jerome Gambit Gemeinde, (a role Gerhard Gunderam often took in the Blackmar Diemer Gemeinde).

Andres Clemente Vazquez, Mexican Chess Champion, played the Jerome Gambit three times in his 1876 match against William Carrington, scoring 3-0. The second (1885) and third (1889) editions of his Analisis del juego de ajedrez contain analysis of the gambit.

Henry Charlick, of Australia, who experimented with 1.d4 e5, played the Jerome Gambit in his 1881 match with J. Mann; and earlier experimented in his 1877 game against Holloway with what might be called the "Evans Jerome Gambit": 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4 Bxb4 5.c3 Bc5 6.Bxf7 (1-0, 76).

Lt. S. A. Sorensen, whose "Skaktheori for Segyndere" ("Chess Theory for Beginners") in the May 1877 Nordisk Skaktidende analyzed the Jerome Gambit, saw his work translated and published all around the world. His 1888 game against an anonymous player (the first example of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.d4 Qh4 that I have found) shows that he played the Jerome as well.

S. A. Charles, a member of the Cincinnati (Ohio, USA) Chess Club, wrote opening analyses, first for the Cincinnati Commercial Gazette, then later for the Pittsburgh Telegraph. It is in the latter paper that in 1881 he presented his examination of the Jerome Gambit. That year he also played an incomplete Jerome Gambit correspondence match with Alonzo Jerome.

J.W. Miller, also of the Cincinnati Chess Club, published in 1884 Cook's Synopsis of Chess Openings A Tabular Analysis by William Cook, With American Inventions in the Openings and Fresh Analysis since 1882. It included a reprint of Cook's Synopsis, 3rd edition (1882) which had been very popular and was already out of print. The Synopsis contained analysis of the Jerome Gambit which was based largely on Sorensen's article. The American supplement portion of the book contained Jerome Gambit analysis based largely on the work of S.A. Charles.

E. Freeborough and and C. E. Ranken included analysis of the Jerome Gambit in their Chess Openings Ancient and Modern (1st edition 1889, 2nd edition 1893, 3rd edition 1896, 4th edition 1910), a book that has been reprinted at least once in the modern era (Hippocrene Books, 1974) and which has been the introduction to the Jerome for a good number of players.

There are others who played or wrote about the Jerome Gambit in its early days, and I hope to welcome them into the Gemeinde in future posts.

The Evans Jerome Gambit

From the Adelaide Observer, May 12, 1877

"Chess"
H. Charlick
"Chess in Adelaide"

The following long and stubbornly-contested game was fought April 4, 1877, on the occasion of the visit to Adelaide, during the Easter holidays, of Mr. A. Holloway, of Williamstown, formerly of the Bristol Chess Club. The other game, between the same pair of players, won, at the Kt odds, by Mr. Holloway, was published a few weeks ago. The present partie was played on equal terms.

Charlick,H - Holloway,A
Australia, 1877
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4 Bxb4 5.c3 Bc5 6.Bxf7+ Kxf7 7.Nxe5+ Nxe5 8.Qh5+ Ng6 9.Qd5+ Kf8 10.Qxc5+ d6 11.Qe3 Nf6 12.d4 Kf7 13.0-0 Re8 14.Nd2 c6 15.f4 Kg8 16.Re1 Kh8 17.Ba3 Nd5 18.Qg3 Ndxf4 19.Nc4 c5 20.e5 Qh4 21.Nxd6 Be6 22.Nxe8 Rxe8 23.Bxc5 b6 24.Bd6 Bc4 25.Qxh4 Nxh4 26.Rad1 Nhxg2 27.Re4 Bd5 28.Rde1 Re6 29.c4 Nxe1 30.cxd5 Rg6+ 31.Kf1 Ned3 32.e6 Nxd5 33.e7 Nxe7 34.Rxe7 h6 35.Bg3 a5 36.d5 Nc5 37.d6 Rf6+ 38.Kg1 Kh7 39.Be5 Rg6+ 40.Kf1 Rg5 41.d7 Nxd7 42.Bc7 Rd5 43.Re6 Rf5+ 44.Kg1 Rf6 45.Re7 Nc5 46.Be5 Rg6+ 47.Kf1 Nd3 48.Bc3 a4 49.a3 b5 50.Rb7 Rg5 51.h4 Rg4 52.Ke2 Rg3 53.Rxb5 Nc1+ 54.Kd2 Nb3+ 55.Kc2 Rg2+ 56.Kd1 Rg3 57.Be5 Rg4 58.Rb4 Rxb4 59.axb4 Kg6 60.Kc2 Kf7 61.Bc3 g5 62.hxg5 hxg5 63.Kb2 Ke6 64.Ka3 Kd5 65.Kxa4 Kc4 66.Be5 g4 67.b5 Nc5+ 68.Ka5 Nd7 69.Bg3 Kd5 70.Bf2 Nc5 71.Kb6 Nd7+ 72.Kc7 Ne5 73.b6 Nc6 74.b7 Nb4 75.Bg3 Ke6 76.Bd6 1-0