The Jerome Gambit Article (Part 3)

Here continues the Jerome Gambit article that I wrote for Kaissiber, a decade ago.

The Cincinnati connection is an important one in the story of the development of the Jerome Gambit. In the 1870 and 1880s, the chess column of the Commercial Gazette, conducted by J. W. Miller, was considered to be one of the best in the United States. It occasionally ran opening analysis presented by S. A. Charles, a member of the local chess club. By January 1881, Charles had switched to sending his analyses to the Pittsburgh Telegraph (later, the Chronicle-Telegraph), when the January 19, 1881 column noted

The following careful and complete analysis of the Jerome Gambit,

one of the newest attacks in chess, and to be found in but few books, was compiled and condensed for THE TELEGRAPH by Mr. S. A. Charles,

President of the Cincinnati Chess Club, and victor in its recent tourney.

            Charles had met the American Chess Journal challenge, but his analysis did not include all of the lines explored in the Journal.

The February 2, 1881 Pittsburgh Telegraph column ran a game (a win) by Jerome, noting that the gambit

…although unsound, as shown by Mr. Charles' analysis in this

column, yet leads to some interesting and critical positions.

On April 27, 1881, the Telegraph chess column presented more information from Mr. Charles, including the fact that he had been in contact with the Gambit’s originator

To the Chess Editor of the Telegraph

A few weeks ago I sent you a compilation of such analysis as

 I could find of the “Jerome Gambit,” not claiming to present anything

new, but only to furnish in a compact form some information which was

not probably accessible to most of your readers.

Since its publication I have received some letters from Mr. Jerome,

the inventor of the gambit, claiming that his gambit was sound and that

the attack could be improved upon in some of the variations given.

Mr. Jerome's claims as to the corrections, at last, seem to be well founded,

and I give below, as an appendix to my former article, a short tabular

statement covering the principal changes and corrections suggested by him.

It is much to be hoped that Mr. Jerome may himself give to the

public at an early date his own analysis of this, the only opening of any

note of American Invention .

A few weeks later, on June 8, 1881, the Telegraph, having heard from Jerome, ran the following, responding to Charles’ comments. It shows Jerome again trying to keep the value and uniqueness of his Gambit in perspective, despite the excitement, in the American post-Morphy period, for something exciting, new, and homegrown

A letter received from Mr. A. W. Jerome calls attention to the fact

that he does not claim the Jerome Gambit to be analytically sound, but only

that over the board it is sound enough to afford a vast amount of amusement.

Mr. J. refers to the so-called "Meadow Hay" opening as being an American
invention. Well, if that is so, the less said about it the better for American

chess reputation.

In October 1881, the Jerome Gambit broke onto the international scene again, in Brentano's Chess Monthly, (edited by H.C. Allen & J.N. Babson), with a letter and analysis from S. A. Charles

Some time since I published in the Pittsburgh Telegraph a

compilation of such analyses of the Jerome Gambit as I could find, with

some additions from published games. Mr. Jerome justly criticized some

            of the moves as not being the best for either party, and we commenced

as series of correspondence games more as a test of the opening than of

individual skill.

Unfortunately Mr. Jerome's business engagements have prevented

him from playing out the full number of games originally started; yet the

situation even in the unfinished games seems to me at least to prove the

gambit unsound, and that while White may win against weak, he cannot

do against strong play.

I should add, perhaps, that Mr. Jerome does not consider the defenses

here given to 6.d4 to be the best but he does not suggest any others.

The November 2, 1881 chess column in the Pittsburgh Telegraph ran Charles’ corrected and slightly updated version of his analysis from Brentano's Chess Monthly.

The year 1882 brought yet more attention, from respectable sources, to the Jerome Gambit. William Cook, with the assistance of E. Freeborough and C. E. Ranken, brought out the third edition of his Modern Chess Openings-style Cook's Synopsis of the Chess Openings A Tabulated Analysis. Cook noted about his work

...Inasmuch as the book does not lay claim to originality, the acknowledgement of the sources from which the variations have been collected is perhaps unnecessary; but it should be mentioned that the last edition of the "Handbuch des Schachspiels," Mr. Gossip's "Theory

of the Openings" and Mr. Wayte's able reviews of these works, together with the excellent Chess column of the Field and other papers, the New Chess Monthly and the well-known Chess Player's Chronicle have been indispensable to the production of this book.

            The 3^rd edition included analysis of the Jerome Gambit for the first time, and noted that the gambit, “although unsound, affords some highly instructive analysis.”

Two year later, Cook’s Synopsis - already out of print and still in great demand - was reprinted in its entirety by J. W. Miller, with an additional section, 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.

This 1884 American Supplement contained two doses of Jerome: Cook’s analysis in the Synopsis portion, and S. A. Charles’ analysis, in the Supplement portion. Miller added the blusterous caution

The "Jerome Gambit," 4.Bxf7+, involves an unsound

sacrifice; but it is not an attack to be trifled with. The defense

requires study, and is somewhat difficult.

By the way, we can get a measure of the still-light-hearted sense of the Gambit at that time, from a note in the Pittsburgh Chronicle-Telegraph chess column for the February 27, 1884

In Cincinnati we met a number of players in the Mercantile

Library… 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 chess column (Maurian and Seguin) of the New Orleans Times-Democrat, for October 19, 1884, reviewed the American Supplement, and hinted that the Jerome Gambit, among others, might have found its way onto the pages at least in part because of its American heritage

With regard to the "American Inventions," whether certain of

these so-called be worthy of the honor of insertion or not, it is evident

that the editor has done good and useful work, if only in collecting and

recording such in enduring form as monuments along the pathway of

our national chess progress.

The review continued the following week, and had several interesting comments pertaining to the Jerome Gambit coverage

Of course, any extended and minute examination of the various

openings or defenses included among these "American Inventions," is

impossible in the limited space of a chess column, but there are some

salient points in this connection that have specially attracted our notice...

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. The

principal basis for most of these has been, we believe, Sorenson's article

in the May, 1877, number of the Nordisk Skaktidende, and which as

translated in Gossip's Theory, pp.37-39, furnishes the only two variations

upon the opening given in the Synopsis proper (ccf. p.49, cols 11 and 12).

We note, however, that Mr. Charles differs from this authority in some

important particulars…

Of course, White should lose eventually, for the gambit is an

admittedly and rather conspicuously unsound one…

[to be continued]

The Jerome Gambit Article (Part 2)

From the previous post:

Ten years ago I wrote a substantial article on the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) and submitted it to the German language chess magazine, Kaissiber.  The editor, Stefan Buecker, was supportive, and tried, over the years, to somehow make the submission work. His was a serious and well-respected magazine, however, and even a well-written (and revised) piece on a highly suspect chess opening could not find a place in its pages.

My presentation of the article continues. 

This light-hearted approach found full form in the May 1877 issue of the Danish chess magazine Nordisk Skaktidende, where Lieutenant Soren Anton Sorensen, analyzed the Jerome Gambit in his “Chess Theory for Beginners” column:

With this answering move of the Bishop [1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6

3.Bc4 Bc5] we have the fundamental position for that good old game

which the Italians, hundreds of years ago, when they were masters of

the Chessboard, called "Giuoco Piano," even game, but the later age,

for generality of explanation, the "Italian game." On this basis the

usual continuation is 4.c3, whereby the QP at the next move threatens

to advance, and the White middle Pawns to occupy the centre. In the

next articles we will make mention of that regular fight for the

maintenance or destruction of the center, which is the essential point

of the Italian game; in this, on the contrary, we will occupy ourselves

with a Bashi-Bazouk attack, over which the learned Italians would

have crossed themselves had they known it came under the idea of

piano, but which is in reality of very recent date - 1874, and takes it

origin from an American, A.W. Jerome. It consists in the sacrifice of a

piece by 4.Bxf7+. Naturally we immediately remark that it is unsound,

and that Black must obtain the advantage; but the attack is pretty sharp,

and Black must take exact care, if he does not wish to go quickly to the

dogs. A little analysis of it will, therefore, be highly instructive, not to

say necessary, for less practiced players, and will be in its right place

in our Theory, especially since it is not found in any handbook. The

Americans call the game "Jerome's double opening," an allusion,

probably, to the fresh sacrifice of a piece which follows at the next

move, but we shall prefer to use the short and sufficiently clear

designation, Jerome Gambit.

This nomenclature was examined earnestly in the Huddersfield College Magazine of July 1879

            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)

           

The August 1877 issue of the British Chess Player’s Chronicle and the December 1877 issue of the Italian Nuova Rivista Degli Scacchi, reprinted Sorensen’s article (in English and Italian, respectively), introducing the Jerome Gambit to an even wider audience. Almost every Jerome Gambit analyst since has leaned heavily on Sorensen.

Hallock reconciled with Jerome in the September & October 1877 issue of the American Chess Journal

            We are pleased to note that the daring and brilliant debut

invented by our friend Jerome, of Paxton, Ill, is receiving

recognition abroad, both among players and analysts. Sr. Vazquez,

the Mexican Champion, plays it with fine success when yielding

the odds of a Knight, while Mr. Charlick, a strong Australian

player, has been giving us some fine specimens of his chess skill in

the new opening; some time since the Italian Chess Magazine published

a game at this opening with favorable comments on the “new departure,”

and in the May number of the Nordisk Skaktidende, S. A. Sorensen

gives us a sparkling analysis of the “Americanism,” a translation of

which we herewith present. The MSS was submitted to Mr. Jerome,

who expresses himself highly pleased with the thoroughness and ability

with which our Danish contemporary has presented the subject…

            Now that chess players abroad are investigating the merits of

the Jerome we would suggest that our magnates at home give it some

attention…

               Interest in the Jerome Gambit did not remain just among beginning chess players. 

A couple of years later, Andres Clemente Vazquez included three wins with the Gambit, from 

his 1876 match against carrington, in his Algunas Partidas de Ajedrez Jugadas in Mexico por 

Andres Clemente Vazquez.

G. H. D. Gossip’s 1879 book, Theory of the Chess Openings, included an analysis of the Jerome Gambit,
“substantially the same” as that which appeared in the Chess Player’s Chronicle, as the latter noted in a review of the work. At about the same
time, the American daily newspaper, the Cincinnati Commercial Gazette, in its chess column, struck the right tone in its review of Theory,
noting gleefully

...the Jerome Gambit, which high-toned players sometimes affect 

to despise because it is radically unsound, finds a place, and to this it is certainly entitled.”

The next year, in 1880, when the 6th edition of the illustrious Handbuch des Schachspiels was published, the Commercial
Gazette’s chess columnist was again ready to “complain” about the state of affairs 

…that the"Jerome Gambit" should be utterly (even if deservedly) ignored.



 [to be continued]

Jerome Gambit Secrets #4

One of my favorite Jerome Gambit "secrets" has actually been solved, but the story is always a good one to tell. And tell again.

Let's look at a line.

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Kf8

About 4 1/2 years ago I posted about this move

As early as his first article with analysis (Dubuque Chess Journal 4/1874), Alonzo Wheeler Jerome considered the possibility that Black might refuse to capture the second piece, and play for King safety instead with 5...Kf8.  

This was, in fact, the defense that Jerome, himself, credited to G. J. Dougherty, ("a strong amateur, against whom I first played the opening") of Mineola, New York, in a yet unfound game; that O.A. Brownson, editor of the Dubuque Chess Journal, played against Jerome in an 1875 game (Dubuque Chess Journal3/1875); that magazine editor William Hallock used against D.P. Norton in an 1876 correspondence game played “by special request” to test the gambit (American Chess Journal 2/1877); that William Carrington tried in his 1876 match vs Mexican Champion Andres Clemente Vazquez (Algunas Partidas de Ajedrez Jugadas en Mexico, 1879); and which Lt. Soren Anton Sorensen recommended as “more solid and easier to manage” in his seminal Jerome Gambit essay (Nordisk Skaktidende 5/1877). 

It is interesting that early in Jerome's Gambit's life, there were players willing to accept one "gift" but who were skeptical of accepting two "gifts".

6.Qh5

This move shows up in 38 games in The Database, with White scoring 49%.

As I noted

White also has the option of playing 6.Qh5, the Banks Variation, as in Banks - Rees, Halesowen, 2003, when Black can transpose with 6…Nxe5  as recommended by the American Chess Journal, (3/1877) - "The continuation adopted by Jerome, Qh5 looks promising." 

Pete Banks ("blackburne" online), a stalwart member of the Jerome GambitGemeinde (and still the strongest player I know who has played the Jerome regularly over-the-board in rated contests), brought international attention to Alonzo Wheeler Jerome's invention by writing to International Master Gary Lane, who commented at length on the opening, and on a couple of Banks' games, in his March ("The Good Old Days") and April ("Chess Made Easy") 2008 "Opening Lanes" columns at ChessCafe.com. IM Lane also mentioned one of Banks' games in his The Greatest Ever chess tricks and traps (2008), which reprised some of the earlier material. 

It is humorous to note that in his "Opening Lanes" column Lane wrote, after 5.Nxe5+, "I think anyone with good manners playing Black would now kindly ask their opponent if they wanted to take their move back" while in his book he changed this to "I think anyone with good manners playing Black would now go to another room to carry on laughing." 

Apropos the Banks Variation itself (i.e. playing 6.Qh5 in response to 5...Kf8), IM Lane noted in "The Good Old Days" that "6...Qe7 is a good alternative [to 6...Qf6 of Banks - Rees], because it stops the checkmate and protects the bishop on c5." 

A few months later, 6...Qe7 was tested successfully in a GameKnot.com game, splott - mika76, 2008: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Kf8 6.Qh5 Qe7 7.Ng6+ hxg6 8.Qxh8 Qxe4+ 9.Kf1 Qd4 10.Ke1 Qxf2+ 11.Kd1 d6 12.h3 Qxg2 13.Re1 Qf3+ 14.Re2 Bf2 15.d3 Nd4 16.Nc3 Qh1+ 17.Kd2 Nf3 checkmate. Clearly White, the very-slightly-higher rated player, was taken aback by the move. I asked mika76 if he had been influenced by IM Lane's recommendation, but he said he had come up with the move himself.

Jerome Gambit: A Mockery of Common Sense

I really enjoyed the game in the previous post, so I looked in The Database for some more games by the Jerome Gambiteer obviously. The next game is even more wild, as White takes even greater risks - and wins.

obviously - grobnic
GameKnot.com, 2004

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 

This can lead to the infamous Blackburne Defense (7...d6), or the much-less-known but much-more-dangerous Whistler's Defense (7...Qe7).

7.Qxe5 Qe7 8.Qxh8

The Database is notoriously lean when it comes to either early Jerome Gambits, or over-the-board games. Coverage of Whistler's Defense is a good example.

There are 3 early correspondence games by Alonzo Wheeler Jerome (1876, 1879) where he scored 0-2-1.

Then, over 100 years later, there are then a handful of online games at FICS: 1 in 1999 (0-1); 1 in 2001 (1-0); 3 in 2003 (1-1-1); and then 10 in 2004 (4-5-1) - 7 of which involved obviously.

So, White's 8th move in the current game (capturing the Rook) probably deserves the same annotation it garnered in The American Chess Journal, June 15, 1876, when it showed up Jerome - Norton, correspondence, 1876 -

Played experimentally; and analysis will probably show the capture to be unsound. 

Analysis has since shown the capture of the Rook to be unsound - but, then again, analysis, even back in the 1870s, showed the Jerome Gambit itself to be unsound...

We must remember, however, that "all is new that has been forgotten", and that both players in the current game probably had little information on either the Whistler or the Jerome to guide them. That said, obviously obviously had some knowledge of the opening, as he scored 4-0-1 with the Black pieces, and 2-0 with the White pieces.

For that matter, The Database contains 59 games with the Whistler Defense, and White scores 57% - an indication that things are complicated enough that the first player will have his chances, at least in club play.

8...Qxe4+

This is the way to show that White's King is in more danger than Black's.

Bill Wall, who seems to be able to get away with just about anything in the Jerome Gambit, once experienced 8...Qf6 9.Qxh7+ Kf8 10.O-O Black resigned, Wall,B - Sepoli, Chess.com, 2010.

9.Kd1

This move is about as strong as 9.Kf1, e.g. 9...Nf6 10.d3 (10.Nc3 Qxc2 11.h4 b6 12.Qd8 Ba6+ White resigned, grobnic - obviously, GameKnot.com, 2004) 10...Qd4 (10...Qf5 11.f3 Bf8 12.Nc3 d5 13.h4 Qd7 14.h5 Bg7 15.hxg6+ Kxg6 16.Rh6+ Bxh6 17.Bxh6 b6 18.Ne2 Qf7 19.Qf8 Qxf8 20.Bxf8 drawn Jerome,A - Norton,D, correspondence, 1876) 11.Be3 Qxb2 12.Bxc5 Qxa1?! (12...d6 13.Ke2 Qxc2+ 14.Nd2 Bg4+ White resigned, flatchio - obviously, GameKnot.com, 2004) 13.Qf8+ Ke6 14.Qe7+ Kf5 15.Ke2 Qe5+ 16.Qxe5+ Kxe5 17.Re1 d6 18.Kf3+ Kf5 19.Bd4 Kg5 20.h4+ Kf5 21.Re7 Nd5 22.g4 checkmate, Wall,B - Neilson,C, Melbourne, FL 2017.

9...Qg4+

This move is good, but perhaps not quite as strong as 9...Qxg2, e.g. 10.Re1 (10.Qxh7+ Kf8 11.Re1 d5 12.d4 Bg4+ 13.Kd2 Qxf2+ 14.Re2 Qxe2+ 15.Kc3 Qc4+ 16.Kd2 Qxd4+ 17.Ke1 Qd1 checkmate, blackburne - perrypawnpusher, Jerome Gambit thematic, ChessWorld.net, 2008) 10...Qf3+ (going for a repetition in a winning position) 11.Re2 Qh1+ 12.Re1 Qf3+ 13.Re2 Qh1+ 14.Re1 Qf3+ drawn, Wall,B - Mathieubuntu, 40 0, FICS, 2011.

Black risked most of his advantage with the reasonable precaution 9...Nf6, although he was still able to outplay his opponent: 10.f3 Qh4 11.Nc3 b5 12.Qd8 Qg5 13.Ne4 Nxe4 14.Qxg5 Nxg5 15.d4 Be7 16.d5 h5 17.h4 Nh7 18.Bf4 d6 19.Ke2 Nf6 20.Rhd1 Bb7 21.Bg5 Nxd5 22.Bxe7 Nxe7 23.g4 hxg4 24.fxg4 Rh8 25.Rf1+ Ke8 26.h5 gxh5 27.g5 Rg8 28.Rg1 Bc8 29.Kd2 Bg4 30.Rg3 Rxg5 31.Re1 Kd7 32.Rh1 a5 33.Re1 h4 34.Rge3 Nd5 35.Re4 h3 36.R4e3 Nxe3 White resigned, vallabhan - obviously, GameKnot.com, 2004

10.Ke1

White improves on the historical 10.f3 Qxg2 11.Qxh7+ Kf8 12.Re1 d5 13.Qh4 Qxf3+ 14.Re2 Bg4 15.Nc3 Bf2 White resigned, Jerome,A - Whistler,G, correspondence, 1876.

10...Qxg2 11.Qxh7+ Kf8 12.Rf1 Qe4+

Again, good, but not best (12...d5). It is still hard to see how White will survive, but he does have a material advantage...

13.Kd1 d5

Chess can be incredibly cruel.

White's defense here has in good part consisted of shuttling his King back and forth. Black now plays the move recommended in the last note - and it turns over the advantage to his opponent.

It appears he needed to play 13...Qf3+ first. What difference does the check make? White shows with his next move.

14.f3 

In what appears to be a mockery of common sense, Stockfish 8 now claims that White has a clear advantage, giving 14...Qf4 15.Nc3 c6 16.Ne2 Qf6 17.d3 Bf5 18.Ng3 Re8 19.Nxf5 Qxf5 20.Bd2 Bd4 21.Kc1 Re7 22.Qh4 c5 23.a4 Re2 24.Kd1 Rg2 25.Qd8+ Kg7 26.Kc1 Bxb2+ 27.Kxb2 Rxd2 28.Qc7+ Kh8 29.Qxc5 Qxd3 30.Rf2.

14...Bg4 

It is difficult to explain this move. It is tempting to suggest a mouse slip, but the time control for this game was 5 days per move.

15.fxg4+ Nf6 Black resigned

After 16.Rxf6+ Ke8 17.Nc3!? White's pieces will be able to protect his King from too many Queen checks, while Black's King will be open to great dangers.

Old News

The American Chess Journal for December 1876 (page 119) under its "Chess News And Notes" mentioned

In a letter recently received from Max Judd, the well-known St. Louis champion, in referring to the article in November JOURNAL concerning "Jerome's Double Opening," he remarks: " What you say about the Jerome Gambit is just so. In an off-hand game you can try many other sacrifices which might succeed, but I know of no gambit wherin a piece can be safely sacrificed, and it is a question whether even a pawn can be safely given up."

Bop!

Playing the Jerome Gambit is a lot like giving your opponent a weapon - and then stepping in and bopping him on the nose before he figures out how to use it. If you are fast or skilled (or lucky) enough, you can walk away with a win.

IagainstI - kingphilippineda
blitz, FICS, 2013

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 Qe7 

This is Whistler's Defense, as opposed to the much better known 7...d6, Blackburne's Defense. The offered Rook is poison.

8.Qxh8 

When Alonzo Wheeler Jerome played this move against D.P. Norton in a correspondence game in 1876, the American Chess Journal, June 15th, noted that it was "[P]layed experimentally; and analysis will probably show the capture to be unsound." White was fortunate to draw the game, however.

8...Qxe4+

Black immediately lost his way with 8...Qf6 9.Qxh7+ Kf8 10.O-O Black resigned, Wall,B - Sepoli, Chess.com, 2010. Bop! 

9.Kf1

Even worse is 9.Kd1 although you couldn't tell by the result of  Wall,B - Mathieubuntu, FICS, standard 40 0, 2011 (1/2 - 1/2, 14). Bop!

A  more representative 9.Kd1 game is blackburne - perrypawnpusher, JG3 thematic, ChessWorld.net, 2008 (1-0, 17). The earliest example, equally educational, is Jerome,A - Whistler,G, correspondence, 1876 (0-1, 15).

9...Qc4+ 

9...Nf6 was the start of White getting off the hook in Jerome,A - Norton,D, correspondence, 1876 (1/2, 1/2, 20). Bop!

Likewise, the text gives White a breather, and that is all that he needs to reverse his fortunes.

Instead, Black needed to continue to both attack and defend with 9...Qh4.

10.d3

The only move.

10...Qxc2 11.Qxh7+

Now White's Queen is more dangerous, and Black's King is more at risk.

11...Kf8 12.Bh6+ Nxh6 13.Qxh6+ Kf7 14.Qf4+

Or 14.Qd2 Qa4 15.Nc3 d6 16.Nxa4 Black resigned, in Abijud - Jeru, blitz, FICS, 2005. Bop!

14...Ke8 15.Nd2 Qxd3+ 16.Kg1 Bd6 17.Re1+ Kd8

Black resigned

Mate will arrive in a couple of moves.

Even against the better defense 17...Be7, Black's unsafe King would guarantee more suffering, e.g. 18.Qf6 Qd6 19.Qh8+ Kf7 20.Nc4 when the entry of White's Knight will either cost Black his Queen, or lead to checkmate. Bop!

The George J. Dougherty Club

Vera Menchik (1906 - 1944), the world's first women's chess champion, also competed in chess tournaments against men.

In 1929, Albert Becker jokingly suggesting that any player that she defeated in tournament play should be granted membership in "The Vera Menchik Club".

Of course, Becker became the first member of the "club", which came to include such noted players as C.H.O.D. Alexander, Edgar Colle, Max Euwe, Harry Golombek, Mir Sultan Khan, Jacques Mieses, Philip Stuart Milner-Barry, Karel Opočenský, Samuel Reshevsky, Friedrich Sämisch,  Lajos Steiner,  George Thomas, William Winter,  and Frederick Yates.

I mention this bit of chess history because of a current discussion of the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) taking place at Chess.com, where members have weighed in with various levels of skepticism:

There is very little chance of succeding with that gambit

I suggest you find something better

White has nothing

the gambit is completely unsound

not a variation to take anyone's game forward

simply throws away two minor pieces

unless your opponent is a child and you are playing a bullet game on Halloween, it doesn't look like a wise opening choice

an unsound gambit

You may surprise some in bullet, that's all

Those were the polite comments, mind you.

Anyhow, I thought it was time for me to inaugurate "The George J. Dougherty Club".

In the March 1877 American Chess Journal, Alonzo Wheeler Jerome reminisced that he had first played his gambit (successfully, too) against G.J. Dougherty of Mineola, New York, "a strong amateur".

That makes it interesting to recall that while it was in the April 1874 issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal that Jerome's "New Chess Opening" was first announced, the very next month's Journal carried this notice

Chess Challenge

George J. Dougherty, of Mineola, Queen's County, New York, hereby respectfully invites John G. Belden, Esq., of Hartford, Conn., to play him two games of chess by Postal Card, at his convenience, Mr. Belden taking the attack in one game and Mr. Dougherty in the other; the object being to test the soundness of Jerome's Double Opening, published in the April No. (50) of this Chess Journal. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+

Mr. Dougherty, it seems, was willing to see what he could do to add other players to the growing list of those who had lost to the Jerome Gambit.

It is fitting that we name a "club" after him.

Like a Needle in a Haystack (Part 3)

The March 1874 issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal contains a game between "Mr. S" (William A. Shinkman?) and Alonzo Wheeler Jerome – a King's Gambit won by Jerome. This was followed by further contributions by Jerome, in April and July of the same year; and in January, March, June, October and November of the following year.

Consistent with yesterday's post (see "Like a Needle in a Haystack Part 2"), after information from Jerome appeared in the March 1876 issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal, new items began to appear in Hallock's American Chess Journal, in June, September, October, November and December of 1876. Alonzo Wheeler Jerome had begun corresponding with the "new" chess journal.

Jerome contributed to the February, March and April 1877 issues of the American Chess Journal, and then seems to have lost contact or interest. Hallock's ACJ ended publication December 1877.

Brownson's Chess Journal had one Jerome item that year, in March of 1877

For the Jerome Opening play a few games by correspondence with A. W. Jerome (the inventor), P.O. address, Paxton, Ford Co., Illinois, and try it over the board when the opportunity offers. It is brilliant.

(Ten years later, the May 1887 issue of Brownson's Chess Journal published an unusual Giuoco Piano with Jerome playing Black.)

What publication did A.W. Jerome correspond with after the American Chess Journal ? The trail grows cold...

Until Jerome appears, mostly in support of S.A. Charles, in the Cincinnati Commercial Gazette and Pittsburgh Telegraph of the early 1880s (a tale for another time); and then over 20 years later, in the pages of the 1900 Literary Digest, offering to play his Gambit against readers in consultation.

Yet, just the other day I was wandering through the Chess Archaeology site (http://www.chessarch.com/) and encountered the "Jack O'Keefe Project Index" which has viewable chess columns from 33 older periodicals. By chance I happened upon some "cuttings" there from "Mackenzie's Chess Chronicle" published in Turf, Field and Farm. The August 30, 1878 column has the following

We are indebted to Mr. A. W. Jerome for some correspondence games illustrative of the new Jerome Gambit, which shall receive early attention.

Aha! The game is afoot!

Sadly, the Chess Archaeology site's collection of "Mackenzie's Chess Chronicle" runs only to December 27, of 1878, and there is no further mention of the Jerome Gambit in that span... Although that last held issue provides some foreshadowing, announcing as it does

We welcome with pleasure a new chess column in the Cincinnati Commercial. It made its first appearance in the issue of Dec. 14, and is to appear every Saturday in the daily; the column is conducted by Mr. J. W. Miller, and, judging from the two specimens we have seen, it promises to be a valuable addition to the chess periodicals.

Like a Needle in a Haystack (Part 2)

Of course, primary historical sources of Jerome Gambit games and analysis are the chess magazine and magazine and newpaper chess columns of the period. Finding a Jerome "needle" in that many "haystacks" without some kind of a clue can be an exhausting task.

An excellent example of such a "clue" is the Jerome Gambit entry from the Oxford Companion to Chess (1984) by David Hooper and Kenneth Whylde

Jerome Gambit in the Italian Opening; an unsound gambit that can lead to much amusement in light hearted play. It first appeared in the American Chess Journal, 1876, recommended by the American player Alonzo Wheeler Jerome (1834-1902) of Paxton, Illinois.

While games and references to Alonzo Wheeler Jerome and his gambit can be found in the June, September, November and December 1876 issues of the American Chess Journal, it turns out that analysis appeared two years earlier, in the April 1874 issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal.

Confusing these two journals, by the way, is not difficult. As Tim Harding wrote in his "The Kibitzer" column at ChessCafe.com in 2007

...[T]he Dubuque Chess Journal was started by Professor Brownson in 1870 and he stopped it after number 73 in summer 1876.

He thought he had sold the rights to W. S. Hallock, who produced the first two volumes of The American Chess Journal, beginning with June 1876 and numbered consecutively from Brownson, i.e. he started with number 74... It was published in Hannibal, Missouri, from June 1876 to December 1877...

Hallock apparently did not pay Brownson (or at least that is what Brownson said) so Brownson restarted his magazine as Brownson’s Chess Journal in February 1877, also resuming with number 74. At different times, Brownson varied his titles...

Having re-established his rights, Brownson stopped in 1878, but resumed again many years later... The last three Hallock issues (his incomplete volume 2) were bi-monthly, with the November-December issue very short. Here he announced he had sold his rights to Dr. C. C. Moore in New York...

Because of moving everything to another city, there was a delay and the new series of The American Chess Journal began March 1878... It ended July 1879.

Moore then sold to Barbe, in Chicago, who did his best to continue The American Chess Journal as a quarterly...

Barbe published Vol. 1-Vol. 2, no 3 (Oct 1879-Dec 1881), but actually number 3 was April 1881. To increase the confusion, the issue of October 1880 was headed volume 1 no 5 on the title page, but as this was a quarterly, it should have been vol. 2 no. 1, as Barbe must have realised subsequently. So then comes January 1881, headed Vol. 2 no 2, but the page numbers are continuous from October 1880. Then April 1881 was the last issue...

After the end of Barbe’s series, there were no Journals until Brownson resumed in 1886.

Got it, right?

A New Departure

Jerome - Norton, D.P.
correspondence 1876
notes primarily from the American Chess Journal, September 1876 

One of a series of games now being contested by corresondence between A.W. Jerome of Paxton, Ill. and D. P. Norton of DesMoines, Iowa, for the purpose of testing the merits of the Double Opening invented by Mr. Jerome.

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6

7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 Nf3+

A new departure. 8... Qf6 is the usual play. The text move prevents White from castling.

9.Kf1

9.Kd1 seems better. If 9.gxf3 Qh4+ 10.Kd1 Qf2 and Black has the better position. (See "Vortex")

9... c6

If 9... Ne7 10.e5+ Kc6 11.Qe4+ d5 etc. [For example, after 12.Qxf3 Black is better - RK]

10. gxf3 Qe7

10...Bd4 is good. 11.c3 Nh6 [stronger is 11... g6 - RK] 12. e5+ [12. Qg5 leads to an even game - RK] 12...Kc7 13.Qe4 Bc5.

11.b4

A beautiful attacking move.

11...Bb6

Weak and inconsiderate, losing a Pawn and the exchange.

If Black captures the pawn 11...Bxb4 then 12.c3 Bc5 13.d4 Bxd4! 14.Ba3+ c5 15.cxd4 Kc7 16.dxc5 Qf6! and White has the better game.

11...Bd4 was better, followed by 12.c3 Nh6 etc [Better here was 12...g6 - RK]

12.Bb2 Kc7 13.Qe5+ Qxe5 14.Bxe5+ d6 15.Bxg7

15...Bh3+ 16.Ke2 Bg2 17. Rd1 Ne7 18. Bxh8 Ng6

If 18...Rxh8 19.f5 and Black's game is seriously cramped while White's Pawns would be very strong and difficult to stop.

19.d4

Preferring to save his centre pawns.

19...Rxh8 20.Kf2

[20.Ke3 seems stronger. Black's two pieces now slowly out-play White's Rook. - RK]

20...Nxf4 21.c3 Rg8 22.Nd2 Kd7

23.Ke3 Rf8 24.Rg1 Bd8 25.Kf2 Rg8 26.Ke3 Nh3 27.f4

27...Nxg1

[Possibly better was 27...Nxf4 - RK]

28.Rxg1 Rg4 29.Nf1 Bh3 30.Ng3 Rh4 31.Nf5

31...Bxf5 32.exf5 Bf6 33.Rg3 Rxh2 34.a4 Rh1 35.a5 Re1+ 36.Kf3 Re7 37.Rh3 c5!

38.bxc5 dxc5 39.Rh6 cxd4! 40.cxd4 Bxd4 41.f6 Rf7 42.Ke4 Bxf6 and wins