Earlier this year I posted a game - see "Jerome Gambit: Two English Amateurs" - from R.M. Baird's May 11, 1901 "OVER THE CHESSBOARD" column in The Evening Star.
It turns out that the game had appeared earlier, in the March 17, 1899 chess column (by Samuel Tinsley) in the Kentish Mercury.
It is also quite possible (see "Violet Apple The Life and Works of David Lindsay) that the player of the white pieces was David Lindsay, an early fantasy and science fiction writer (A Voyage to Arcturus [1920], The Haunted Woman [1922], Sphinx [1923], Adventures of Monsieur de Mailly [1926], Devil's Tor [1932]) who appears to have influenced C.S. Lewis and J.R. Tolkien.
There is something "right" about the Jerome Gambit being played by someone caught up in fiction and fantasy.
Showing posts with label Baird. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Baird. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 12, 2018
Wednesday, January 3, 2018
Jerome Gambit: Two English Amateurs
The following game ("between two English amateurs") is from the "OVER THE CHESS BOARD" column titled "A VARIATION OF THE JEROME GAMBIT", conducted by R. M. Baird, in the Evening Star of May 11, 1901.
It is amusing that the columnist cannot recommend the opening, grows impatient when White misses a forcing line - and has nothing to say when White wins.
I have added diagrams, changed the notation from descriptive to algebraic, and provided a few notes in blue. - Rick
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d4 exd4 5.Bxf7+
It is interesting to meet with these variations from the ordinary dull methods. But this line of play cannot be recommended.
5...Kxf7
[Reaching the Jerome Gambit variation: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.d4 exd5]
6.Ng5+ Ke8 7.Qf3 Qe7
If now 7...Qf6 all of White's attack (?) vanishes. Black might even play 7...Ne5 at once.
8.O-O Ne5 9.Qb3 h6 10.Nh7
[Strange. Perhaps expecting 10...Rxh7? 11.Qxg8+ Qf8 12.Qxh7, winning. Black does not fall for the "trap".]
10...g6 11.f4 d3+ 12.Kh1 Ng4 13.f5 Qxh7
14.fxg6 Qxg6 15.Nc3 Qh5 16.Bf4 Nf2+
17.Rxf2 Bxf2 18.Rf1 Bd4 19.Nd5 Bb6
20.Bxc7 d6
[Amazing. Ahead by a Bishop and a Rook, Black finds a move that gives himself a lost game.]
21.Bxd6 Qg6
22.Rf8+
Much easier and simpler was 22.Qb5+ and mate in two moves.
22...Kd7 23.e5 Ne7 24.Qb5+ Nc6 25.Nf6+ Ke6 26.Qd5+ Kf5 27.e6+ Black resigned
It is amusing that the columnist cannot recommend the opening, grows impatient when White misses a forcing line - and has nothing to say when White wins.
I have added diagrams, changed the notation from descriptive to algebraic, and provided a few notes in blue. - Rick
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d4 exd4 5.Bxf7+
It is interesting to meet with these variations from the ordinary dull methods. But this line of play cannot be recommended.
5...Kxf7
[Reaching the Jerome Gambit variation: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.d4 exd5]
6.Ng5+ Ke8 7.Qf3 Qe7
If now 7...Qf6 all of White's attack (?) vanishes. Black might even play 7...Ne5 at once.
8.O-O Ne5 9.Qb3 h6 10.Nh7
[Strange. Perhaps expecting 10...Rxh7? 11.Qxg8+ Qf8 12.Qxh7, winning. Black does not fall for the "trap".]
10...g6 11.f4 d3+ 12.Kh1 Ng4 13.f5 Qxh7
14.fxg6 Qxg6 15.Nc3 Qh5 16.Bf4 Nf2+
17.Rxf2 Bxf2 18.Rf1 Bd4 19.Nd5 Bb6
20.Bxc7 d6
[Amazing. Ahead by a Bishop and a Rook, Black finds a move that gives himself a lost game.]
21.Bxd6 Qg6
22.Rf8+
Much easier and simpler was 22.Qb5+ and mate in two moves.
22...Kd7 23.e5 Ne7 24.Qb5+ Nc6 25.Nf6+ Ke6 26.Qd5+ Kf5 27.e6+ Black resigned
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Worth a Second Look... (Part 2)
Rainer Schlenker refers to 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Bc5 (see "Worth a Second Look... (Part 1)") as the "Busch - Gass Gambit" in the May/June 1985 issue (pp. 69-71) of his magazine Randspringer.
He refers to analysis by Oskar Cordel in Führer durch die Schachtheorie (1888)
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Bc5 3.Nxe5 Qe7 4.d4 Bd6 (4...Bb6 5.Bc4!) 5.f4 f6 6.Nc4 Qxe4+ 7.Kf2 Bxf4 8.Nc3 Qf5 9.Bd3 Qg5 10.Re1+ Ne7 11.Kg1 Nbc6 12.Bxf4 Qxf4 13.Qh5+ Kf8 14.Re4 +/- / +-and analysis included in Bilguer (1916)
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Bc5 3.Nxe5 Qe7 4.d4 Bd6 5.Nc3! Bxe5 6.Nd5 Qd6 7.dxe5 Qxe5 8.Bf4 Qxe4+ 9.Qd2Schlenker, however, modifies the name that Bent Larsen gave to the line ("Busch-Gambit") in Larsen's Sharp Openings (in Danish) based on the game Baird - Busch, 15. Kongresses Deutchen Schachbundes, Nuremberg 1906. Sharp Openings included a portion of the game:
Baird,D - Busch
Nuremberg, 1906
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Bc5 3.Nxe5 Nc6 4.Nf3 Qe7 5.Nc3 Nf6 6.d4 Nxe4 7.Nd5 Bb4+ 8.Bd2 Nxd2+ 9.Nxe7 Nxf3+ 10.Ke2 Nfxd4+ 11.Kd3 Bxe7 12.c3 Ne6 13.Kc2 0-0 14.g3 d5 15.Bd3 Rd8 16.f4 d4 17.f5 dxc3 18.fxe6 Nb4+ 19.Kxc3 Rxd3+ 20.Qxd3 Nxd3 21.exf7+ Kf8 22.Kxd3 Bf5+ 0-1
Schlenker adds the name "Gass" to the variation after the German master who had been playing the line in the 1970s and 1980s, and gives a few examples.
Many of Gass's blitz games have gone:
NN - Gass
blitz (1970 - 1985)
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Bc5 3.Nxe5 Nc6 4.Nxc6 dxc6 5.d3 Nf6 6.Bg5 Nxe4 7.Bxd8 Bxf2+ 8.Ke2 Bg4 checkmate
and then there's
NN - Gass
blitz
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Bc5 3.Nxe5 Nc6 4.Nxc6 dxc6 5.c3 Qe7 6.f3 f5 7.d4 fxe4 8.dxc5 exf3+ 9.Kf2 Nf6 10.Bc4 Ne4+ 11.Kg1 fxg2 12.Kxg2 Bh3+ 13.Kg1 Qxc5+ 14.Qd4 Rd8!! White resigns
While Cordel (1888) and Bilguer (1916) updated the analysis of Salvio (1604) (see "Worth a Second Look... (Part 1)"), Busch and Gass have taken the opening in a different direction: that of a reversed Boden - Kieseritzky Gambit, a move down.
That, too, deserves a second look...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)