At the center of it all is the Jerome Gambit itself, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+. As mentioned in a recent post, Alonzo Wheeler Jerome published analysis of the opening in the April 1874 issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal, played it over-the-board and in correspondence games for about 30 years, and was still defending it in 1900 (two years before his death) in the pages of the Literary Digest.
After 4...Kxf7 Jerome followed with 5.Nxe5+. I call this main line the "classical Jerome Gambit" to differentiate it from other 5th move choices for White (5.0-0, 5.Nc3, 5.c3, 5.d4, etc.) which are popular with modern (mostly internet) chess players. This class of "not-5.Nxe5+" lines are referred to as comprising the "modern Jerome Gambit".
I have not found any examples of A.W. Jerome analyzing or playing "modern" variations. The Dubuque Chess Journal, however, in its November 1874 issue, referred to 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d4 exd4 5.Bxf7+ as "an unsound variation of Jerome's double opening", which anticipated the "modern" Jerome Gambit, by transposition.
After establishing the "modern" Jerome Gambit, is then easy to understand the Semi-Italian Jerome Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.0-0 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ Kxf7 to simply be a transposition into a "modern" line, i.e. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.0-0 h6.
Likewise, the Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ Kxf7, and the Semi-Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.0-0 Nf6 5.Nc3 Bc5 6.Bxf7+ Kxf7, are transpositions to the "modern" as well, i.e. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nc3 Nf6 and 5.0-0 h6 6.Nf3 Nc6.
That leaves the Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4 4.Bxf7+ whose name is a double pleasantry. While the Shilling Gambit has been named after Blackburne, and the title seems to have stuck well, no game or analysis has (yet) been discovered to link the British master with the line. Likewise, Alonzo Wheeler Jerome (as far as I know) never met the Blackburne Shilling Gambit with 4.Bxf7+, either. I've attached the BSJG name because of its similarities to the Jerome Gambit.
In his The Chess Mind (1951) and again in The Pan Book of Chess (1965), Gerald Abrahams referred to the line 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Bxf7+ as the Jerome Gambit (see "Abrahams Jerome Gambit" Part I and Part II). I have not found any examples of Jerome analyzing or playing the Bxf7+ sacrifice out of the Bishop's Opening, as opposed to the Giuoco Piano. Abrahams could have been a better researcher than I am; or he could simply have been in error. A third possibility is that he focused his understanding of the Jerome Gambit on the Bishop-sacrifice-in-the-double-e-pawn-openings, to the neglect of the other supporting moves (i.e. Nf3 and Nc6).
This focus on Bxf7+ seems to have been the case when a reader at Chess.com explained that the Salvio Gambit was also known as the Jerome Gambit. I believe that he was in error, but the discussion is worth reviewing (see "Salvio Gambit??" and "Salvio Gambit?? [more]").
Too, there is the case of Joseph Henry Blackburne referring to the Jerome Gambit, in his Mr. Blackburne's Games at Chess, as "the Kentucky Opening." I believe that I have solved this "mystery" – see "The Kentucky Opening" Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4 and "The Kentucky / Danvers Opening" – in this case, Blackburne was focusing on the move Qh5 for White, which was used in both the Jerome Gambit and in 1.e4 e5 2.Qh5, which was known in the 1870s and 1880s as the Kentucky Opening.
No comments:
Post a Comment