The Jerome Gambit: Not Playing the Jerome Gambit Either

Yesterday's post was enjoyable enough that it was worth looking up another, similar, game in which the first player did not play the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+). Again, Jerome-ish themes echo throughout.

Samuels,L - McCudden,J

Metropolitan Chess League NY, 1925

Notes by Arnold S. Denker unless otherwise indicated, from his "Miniature Games" column in the January 1935 Chess Review (translated from descriptive to algebraic notation)

1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nc6 3.d3 Na5?

4.Bxf7+

4...Kxf7 5.Qh5+ Ke6

If 5...g6 6.Qxe5 winning back the piece with a winning position.

[Obviously Denker expected Black to protect his Rook. Otherwise he would have looked at 6...Nc6 7.Qxh8 h6 8.Bxh6 Bxh6 9.Qh7+ Bg7 10.Nf3, a line Michael Goeller suggested over 70 years later – see "Eric Schiller Doesn't Play the Jerome Gambit". With a Rook and three pawns against two Bishops, White would have a slight edge rather than "a winning position." – RK]

6.Qf5+ Kd6 7.d4

[As we've seen in Schiller - Shipman, New York 1981, 7.f4 was the stronger pawn move – RK]

7...Nc6

8.dxe5+ Kc5

Forced. If 8...Nxe5 9.Bf4 Qf6 [and here Denker wrote "10.Kt-B3!" It is unclear if he meant 10.Nc3! or 10.Nf3! Actually 10.Bxe5+ Qxe5 11.Qxf8+ was the strongest continuation – RK]

9.Be3+ Kb5 10.Qh5