Jerome Gambit: Warping Players' Minds?

Recently I watched a YouTube video by Chess enthusiast titled "Most bishops aggressively attack - Jerome Gambit".

The video showed a game played over-the-board, and I took notes: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 Nc6 8.Qxc5 Qe7 9.Qd5+ Kf6 10.Qf5#

The line looked familiar*, but when I checked The Database, it turned out that it had only a couple of examples.

So, I went online and checked out the games at lichess.org.

I noticed in setting up the board there, that as I entered 9...Kf6,  lichess.org indicated that it had 11 games with that position. It also indicated that from there, White scored 64%.

Only 8 of the 11 games were available for viewing and download. Being naturally curious, I calculated that the average rating of the players with White was about 1465.

Then came a worrying thought: Does the Jerome Gambit warp players' minds such that they can find a checkmate-in-one only about 2/3 of the time? 

Certainly there must be other factors in play! 

[ROFL]

* I had seen it in the video "jerome gambit | the jerome gambit | how to play the jerome gambit | The Master Tricks | chess traps", and, before that, in the game blackburne - karmmark, Jerome Gambit Thematic tournament, ChessWorld.net, 2007.

Jerome Gambit: BSJG Do It Yourself

If you want something done right, the saying goes, you need to do it yourself.

In the following game, Black's King takes charge of the defense against the Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit.

In turn, Bill Wall takes the full point.

Wall, Bill - Adel

PlayChess.com, 2017

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4

The Blackburne Shilling Gambit.

4.Bxf7+

The Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit. 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Ke6 

Black's King takes charge of dealing with the intruder Knight.

6.c3 Nc6 7.d4 Nxe5 8.dxe5 Kxe5 

And that's that - right?

9.Qd5+ Kf6 10.Bg5+ 

This was enough for Black to resign in APe - Sali, blitz, FICS, 2009 and sahistonline - PlatinumKnight, blitz, 2017

10...Kg6 11.Qf5+ 

Or 11.Bxd8 d6 12.Qg5+, as in marciprevi - gregchess, blitz, FICS, 2017. 

11...Kh5 12.g4 checkmate

Jerome Gambit: Abrahams Jerome Bullet

Here is another game by ferit Turkey - he has 944 games in The Database - that shows that the wildness of 1-minute play is often disrupted even further by the Jerome Gambit (or one of its relatives).

Black keeps his game together for almost a dozen moves - and then White takes advantage of a slip, to take the full point.

feritTurkey - kucher-new

1 1 bullet, lichess.org, 2024

1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Bxf7+ 

The Abrahams Jerome Gambit. As pointed out in "'Tis A Puzzlement..."

In his The Chess Mind (1951) Gerald Abrahams admonishes:

Chess opinion has convincingly condemned many extravagant unbalancing attacks, such as the once popular Jerome gambit, (1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Bxf7+), which yield the unbalancer nothing but loss against good defense.

He repeats his guidance in The Pan Book of Chess (1965):

[1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5] ... and nobody in their right senses plays 3.Bxf7+, Jerome's Gambit.

Ah, yes, Abrahams was a chess player and a barrister - but, perhaps, not a mental health professional.  

3...Kxf7 4.Qh5+ 

The absence of a Knight at f3 allows this attack earlier than in the Jerome Gambit.

4...g6 

One benefit of the Abrahams Jerome Gambit as a surprise weapon is that Black really has only one response to the Queen check that maintains his advantage - 4...Kf8. 

If, instead, Black plays 4...Ke6, then 5.Qf5+ Kd6 6.Nf3 Nc6 brings about a position resembling a "modern" Jerome Gambit (White has not played Nxe5) where the White Queen appears to have passed through the Knight on f3. Stockfish 16.1 assesses Black to be about 1/2 pawn better.

5.Qxe5 

This is beginning to look like a Jerome Gambit proper, but Black does not yet have time right now to strike at the Queen with 5...Nc6. For that matter, he could choose 5...Nf6, to protect his Rook, but this would drop the Bishop at c5. 

5...Bxf2+ 

The computer's first choice, surrendering the Bishop but getting a pawn and displacing White's King as compensation.

6.Kf1 

I was surprised that there were 63 games in The Database with White declining the Bishop. However, feritTurkey has scored 5 - 1 with 6.Kf1. 

Clearly, there is some psychology behind White's move ("If you want me to take the Bishop, I won't take the Bishop") - remember in a bullet game, besides surprise openings with surprise tactics, psychology is also a tool. 

6...Nf6 7.Nf3 

Taking the Bishop with 7.Kxf2 now would fall to 7...Ng4+, forking the King and Queen.

7...d6 8.Ng5+ 

I am not sure what this move is about. Bullet players might have more insight.

8...Kg7 9.Qc3 Bc5 10.d4 Bb6 11.e5 

Onward, ever onward. One never won a game by resigning. Plus - there is the clock...

11...Re8 

It is hard to tell, but it is possible that Black jumped ahead in his analysis here, considering 11...dxe5 12.dxe5 Qd1+ 13.Qe1 Qxe1+ 14.Kxe1 before 14...Re8.

In any event, it really does not matter, as he is comfortably ahead, even with the text move.

12.exf6+ Kxf6 

Oh, no.

The right idea was 12...Qxf6+ and all would be well for the second player. 

13.d5+ Ke7 

Reeling further from the surprise - and the fact that there is not a lot of time per move to analyze in a bullet game.

The way of the Stockfish was 13...Re5 14.Bf4 Bf5 15.Nd2 Nd7 16.Nc4 Kg7 17.Bxe5+ Nxe5 18.Nf3 Kg8 19.Nfxe5 dxe5 20.Nxb6 axb6 21.Re1 White is better. 

14.Qg7 checkmate

Jerome Gambit: Blackburne Shilling / Kostic Jerome Gambit (Part 2)

 

[continued from the previous post]

IvanRusskih - zzzwww

Europa League 2022 - 2023 

                                      

We continue with a modern Blackburne Shilling Gambit.

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Ke8 6.Qh5+ Ke7 

Possibly Black wanted to avoid 6...g6 7.Nxg6 hxg6 8.Qxh8, or wasn't interested in the continuing complications, e.g. 8...Nxc2+ 9.Kd1 Nxh1 10.Qxg8 Qg5 although they would leave him a bit better.

For perspective, The Database has over 2,100 games with 6.Qh5+, and Black found the 6...g6 line in 85% of them. Similarly, lichess.org has 77,336 games with the 6.Qh5+ line, and in 84% of the games Black found 6...g6.

The problem with the text is that White now has a forced checkmate with 7.Qf7+ Kd6 8.Nc4+ Kc5 9.Qd5+ Kb4 10.a3+ Ka4 11.Nc3#. 

Bad luck for IvanRusskih.

7.Nc3 

Okay, so zzzwww overlooked the line, too.

7...g6 

Too late, but I do not think that anyone could have conjured up Stockfish 16.1's suggestion: 7...c6 8.Qf7+ Kd6 9.d3 Ne6 10.Qf5 Ke7 11.Nf7 g6 12.Bg5+ Ke8 13.Qe5 Qb6 14.Nd6+ Bxd6 15.Qxh8 Nxg5 16.h4 Ne6 17.Qxg8+ Nf8 18.O-O-O Bf4+ 19.Kb1 d6 20.d4 Qc7 21.Qc4 Qf7 22.d5 Nd7 23.g3 and White is still better, but by not as much.

8.Nd5+ 

8...Ke8 9.Nxg6 

White offers the Knight, after all.

Black, in turn, would rather gain a Rook than surrender one.

9...Nxc2+ 10.Kd1 Nxa1 

He might as well.

11.Nxh8 checkmate

Quite nice.

Joseph Henry Blackburne would probably get a chuckle out of this particular ending to his gambit, even if it is Black who has to turn over his King.

Jerome Gambit: Blackburne Shilling / Kostic Jerome Gambit (Part 1)

William Faulkner wrote in Requiem for a Nun (1919), “The past in never dead. It's not even past.”

Did Faulkner play chess? Quite possibily, as his Knight’s Gambit, a collection of six short stories written in the 1930s and 1940s, featured attorney Gavin Stevens (later to appear in his Intruder in the Dust, 1948) playing chess.

The following modern has significantly older roots.

IvanRusskih - zzzwww

Europa League 2022 - 2023

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4 

The Blackburne Shilling Gambit, so named because Joseph Henry Blackburne supposedly used the opening in many off-hand games, with a shilling wager apiece. (See David Hooper and Kenneth Whylde's The Oxford Companion to Chess, 1984.)

This is reflected in Edward Winter's "Chess Note" #3786,

        From Rick Kennedy (Columbus, OH, USA):

The opening 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nd4 has been called the Blackburne Shilling Gambit, in recognition, apparently, of J.H. Blackburne’s use of it to win small stakes from players. However, I have yet to find a single game with it played by Blackburne. In fact, the earliest game uncovered was played in New Zealand in 1911. How did Blackburne’s name become attached to the variation? Indeed, when did it become attached?

Steinitz’s [The] Modern Chess Instructor [1889] has a note on the line, but does not refer to Blackburne. Mr Blackburne’s Games at Chess [1899] makes no mention of it. Nor does Freeborough and Ranken’s Chess Openings Ancient and Modern [1893] attribute the line (given in a footnote) to anyone. E.E. Cunnington’s books (one on traps [1903], one on openings for beginners [1900]), which were published in London shortly after the turn of the century, give the moves but do not name Blackburne...

What we do know is that several times Blackburne played a variation of what is called the Bird Defense (named after Henry Edward Bird) to the Ruy Lopez, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nd4 4.Bc4, arriving at the Blackburne Shilling Gambit position with an extra tempo for Black.

Lipke, Paul - Blackburne, Joseph Henry

DSB-09.Kongress, Leipzig, Germany, 1894

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nd4 4.Bc4 d6 5.Nxd4 exd4 6.O-O g6 7.c3 Bg7 8.cxd4 Ne7 9.d5 f5 10.d3 O-O 11.f4 Kh8 12.Nc3 c6 13.dxc6 bxc6 14.Kh1 Rb8 15.Bb3 Ba6 16.Re1 d5 17.e5 d4 18.Na4 Nd5 19.Nc5 Bc8 20.Bd2 Qe7 21.Rc1 Rd8 22.Ba5 Rb6 23.Na4 Qb7 24.Qf3 Bf8 25.Re2 Be6 26.Nc5 Bxc5 27.Rxc5 Rxb3 28.axb3 Rg8 29.b4 Ne3 30.Qxc6 Qxc6 31.Rxc6 Bd5 32.Rd6 g5 33.Bd8 Kg7 34.fxg5 f4 35.Kg1 f3 36.gxf3 Bxf3 37.Rf2 Bd5 38.Rf4 h6 39.Rxd4 Ba8 40.h4 hxg5 41.Bxg5 Nf5 42.Rd7+ Kh8 43.Rg4 Ng7 44.Bf6 Black resigned

Duras, Oldrich - Blackburne, Joseph Henry

Ostend-B, Belgium, 1907

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nd4 4.Bc4 d6 5.Nxd4 exd4 6.c3 dxc3 7. Nxc3 c6 8.O-O Be6 9.Bxe6 fxe6 10.d4 Nf6 11.Qb3 Qd7 12.Bg5 Be7 13.Bxf6 gxf6 14.d5 cxd5 15.exd5 e5 16.f4 O-O 17.Rae1 Kh8 18.Kh1 Rg8 19.Re3 Rg7 20.Qb5 Rd8 21.Qd3 Rdg8 22.Re2 Bd8 23.f5 Rg5 24.Qf3 Rg4 25.g3 Qf7 26.Rd1 Bb6 27.Ne4 Qf8 28.Qa3 R4g7 29.Qxd6 Qxd6 30.Nxd6 Rd7 31.Ne4 Kg7 32.Rc2 Kf7 33.Kg2 a5 34.Kf3 Ba7 35.g4 Rgd8 36.d6 h6 37.h4 Bb8 38.Rcd2 Rc8 39.g5 hxg5 40.hxg5 fxg5 41.Rh2 Rg8 42.Kg4 Rdd8 43.Rh7+ Kf8 44.f6 Black resigned

Lewis, John A - Blackburne, Joseph Henry

BCF, Oxford, England, 1910

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nd4 4.Bc4 d6 5.Nxd4 exd4 6.d3 g6 7.O-O Bg7 8.c3 Ne7 9.Qb3 O-O 10.cxd4 Bxd4 11.Be3 Nc6 12.Bxd4 Nxd4 13.Qd1 Be6 14.Nc3 c6 15.Bxe6 fxe6 16.Ne2 Nxe2+ 17.Qxe2 e5 18.d4 Qe7 19.Qc4+ Kg7 20.Rfd1 Rad8 21.Rac1 d5 22.exd5 Rxd5 23.dxe5 Rxe5 24.Qd4 Rf6 25.Qxa7 Re2 26.Qd4 c5 27.Qc3 Rexf2 28.Re1 Qd6 29.Rcd1 Qc6 30.Qh3 Rf7 31.Re6 Rxg2+ 32.Kh1 Rd2+ 33.Rxc6 Rxd1+ 34.Kg2 Rd2+ draw

The earliest example that I have found of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4, from chessgames.com, is

McBride - Hill

club match, 1892

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4 4.Nxe5 Qg5 5.Nxf7 Qxg2 6.Rf1 Qxe4+ 7.Be2 Nf3 checkmate

Occasionally the line is called the Schilling-Kostić Gambit, in part due to an early game by Boris Kostic, which follows the same path.

 

Muehlock - Kostić, Boris

Cologne, Germany, 1912

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4 4.Nxe5 Qg5 5.Nxf7 Qxg2 6.Rf1 Qxe4+ 7.Be2 Nf3 checkmate

According to Bill Wall, the moves of the game were repeated in A. Jordan - Newell Banks, USA, 1917.

By the way, I have seen the spellings "Shilling-Kostić Gambit" (the name makes some sense to me, similar to how "Blackburne Shilling Gambit" does) and "Blackburne-Schilling Gambit" - but I have yet to find a player of that era (late 1800s to early 1900s) named Schilling. I suspect that there was an early mis-spelling, and later sources copied it

4.Bxf7+ 

The Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit. 

Apparently not played by (or faced by) Blackburne, Kostić, Hill or Newell Banks.

The Database has 7,742 games with 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4 4.Bxf7+, with White scoring 57%.

Certainly there is need for more research here. It is a bit odd that in a variation of a variation played by Blackburne (1841-1924) the earliest game in The Database with 4.Bxf7+ is from 1975. 

[to be continued]

Jerome Gambit: Sympathy for the Defender

This being a Jerome Gambit (and related openings) blog, I have generally been sympathetic to those who venture with the White pieces - although I have also noted interesting reverse Jeromes where Black has made the interesting sacrifices.

That said, when I came across the following game, I felt bad (only a little bit) for the loser.

NN - schuylkillvalleychess

Ches.com, 2023

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 

7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.c3 

White plans a Giuco Piano center, but Black has a proper counter.

Alonzo Wheeler Jerome preferred 8.f4 here.

8...Qf6 

9.d4 Qxf5 

The main idea in the defense: exchange White's aggressive Queen.

10.dxc5+ Kxc5 

Despite the placement of Black's King, Stockfish 16.1 rates the second player as being about 4 1/2 pawns better.

11.Be3+ 

The enemy Queen can be captured next move.

11...Kc4 

Advancing away from safety (c6) and into danger.

All of a sudden, this causes White to lose interest in capturing the Queen.

12.Na3+ Kd3 13.O-O-O+ Kxe4 14.Rd4 checkmate

What does it profit a player, if he gains an extra Queen and Knight, if he forfeits his King?

Jerome Gambit: Incomplete Script

 

Many years ago, when I was a middle school student, I wrote a light-hearted playlet about a conflict between a Batman-like hero and his nemesis. It turned out that the bad guy had stolen the actual script of the play from the author before it had been completed (!), so he was able to write in a number of mishaps that befell the good guy in his pursuit of justice. As luck would have it, however, the final confrontation between the two characters had not yet been scripted by the author, and the evil-doer had not bothered to add an ending. So, the hero was able to ad-lib his lines and his actions, allowing good to triumph over evil, and the bad guy - who realized that time had run out on him - was defeated.

This tale was repeated, over an over again, metaphorically, in the games I played against a chess pal at the time, who would regularly complain, "I was beating you, right up to the point where you checkmated me!" Indeed.

All of this came to mind as I played over the following 1-minute Noa Gambit (a Jerome Gambit relative) game by angelcamina. Let me be clear: angelcamina has over 1,200 games in The Database, scoring 62%, and clearly qualifying him as a "good guy".

In the following game, angelcamina battles adversity and is faced, at the end, with distaster. Except, the "script" had not been completed, and with a final move, he triumphed over his opponent.

angelcamina - rutkaycabuk

1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2024

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+ 

As I wrote in "Against the Knights", this is

The Noa Gambit, otherwise known as the Monck Gambit, otherwise known as the Open Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit. White gets his sacrifice, after all.

5...Kxf7 6.Nxe4 d5 7.Neg5+ Kg8 8.d4 

8...e4 9.Ne5 Nxe5 10.dxe5 Be7 11.Nxe4 

In a game with a slow time control, this move might be labelled "self-injurious behavior". In 1-minute bullet game, however, it can be seen as a calculated risk.

11...dxe4 12.Qxd8+ Bxd8 13.Bf4 Bf5 14.O-O-O Be7 15.e6 

15...Rd8 16.Rxd8+ Bxd8 17. Re1 Bf6 18.f3 exf3 

19.e7 f2 

Threatening the Rook, hoping to promote - and overlooking something.

20.e8=Q checkmate

Oh, yeah, that... But it wasn't in the script!