Jerome Gambit: A New Game In An Old Line

Sometimes the best way to understand a recent game is to reflect upon past games with the same line of play. The following game is a good illustration.

Yohannessen - saumilpradhan
5 5 blitz, Chess.com, 2020

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6

The Two Knights Defense. 

Jerome Gambit players have to deal with it - see "Jerome Gambit vs Two Knights Defense (Part 1), (Part 2), (Part 3) and (Part 4)" for starters.

Recently, I have been seeing a lot of games featuring 4.Bxf7+, a variation I have loosely referred to as an "impatient Jerome Gambit" because White does not wait for ...Bc5 before sacrificing.

4.Qe2

White has a different idea. To put it into context, see "No Way A GM Plays the Jerome Gambit! (Part 1)". There is also the historical perspective reflected in "Proto-Jerome Gambits? (Part 3)".

The earliest example that I have seen with this move is Pollock, W.H.K. - Vernon, J.E., Bath vs Bristol match, 1883: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Qe2 Be7 5.d4 d6 6. d5 Nb8 7.Nc3 Nbd7 8.Bd2 Nb6 9.Bb3 Bd7 10.Nd1 a5 11.a3 c6 12.c4 c5 13.O-O O-O 14.Ne1 Ne8 15.f4 Bf6 16.f5 Bg5 17.Ne3 Bxe3+ 18.Bxe3 g6 19.Bh6 Ng7 20.f6 Nh5 21.Bxf8 Kxf8 22.Qe3 Nxf6 23.Nf3 Ng4 24.Qd2 Kg7 25.Ng5 Nh6 26.Rf2 Qe7 27.Raf1 Rf8 28.h4 a4 29.Ba2 drawn

It was also played in Gunsberg - Burn, 6th American Chess Congress, 1889 (1/2-1/2, 27) and Bird - Chigorin, 6th American Chess Congress, 1889 (0-1, 53).

4...Bc5 5.Bxf7+

For the earliest example that I have found of this move, see "Adolf Albin Plays the Jerome Gambit (Part 1 & 2)", which focuses on the game Albin,A - Schlechter,C, Trebitsch Memorial Tournament Vienna, 1914 (0-1, 31).

5...Kxf7 

The game has transposed into a possible Jerome Gambit line: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Qe2 Nf6.

6.Qc4+ Ke8 7.Qxc5 b6 

Black pushes back. If he were able to castle, the pawn deficit would not matter much.

By the way, the alternative, 7...Nxe4 is met by 8.Qe3 d5 9.d3 Nf6 10.Nxe5 and White has recovered the pawn, while opening the dangerous e-file.

8.Qe3 Ba6 9.d3 Nb4 10.Na3 Ng4 

The time control for the game is 5 5 blitz, and a flurry of active pieces is a good strategy. White responds by exchanging Queens. 

11.Qg5 Qxg5 12.Bxg5 h6 13.Bd2 Rf8 

An oversight.

14.Bxb4 Rf4 15.Bd2 Rf6 16.Bc3 d6 17.d4 c5 18.dxe5 dxe5 

19.Nxe5 Rxf2 20.Nxg4 Re2+ 21.Kd1 Rxg2 22.Ne3 Rd8+ 23.Kc1 Re2 24.Nf5 Rd7 25.Bxg7 Rf2 26.Re1 Rdd2 

Black continues to pressure the White King.

27.Bxh6 Rde2 28.Rxe2 Rf1+ 29.Kd2 Rxa1 30.Re1 Rxa2 31.b3 Rxa3 

Play continues in a rowdy fashion, but now White turns to his passed "Jerome pawn".

32.e5 c4 33.bxc4 Bxc4 34.e6 b5 35.e7 a5 36.Ng7+ Kf7 37.e8=Q+ Kf6 38.Qf8+ Kg6 39.Nf5 

Black resigned

 What would happen next: 39...Kh5 40.Qg7 Rd3+ 41.cxd3 a4 42.Qg5 checkmate

Jerome Gambit: Time Bomb (Part 1)

Some thoughts, previously posted

I have long subscribed to the "time bomb" notion in club chess: that players are apt to play reasonable chess until, suddenly, a cognitive "time bomb" goes off, and they make a blunder. The frequency of these "explosions"/blunders depends upon the level of skill of the player: strong players may slip only once a game (or even less often) while more "average" club players can have their "time bombs" go off much more often, even every other move.
The following game shows Black defending reasonably well (and White, solidly) until - Boom! The unbalanced and unbalancing Jerome Gambit is the kind of opening that increases the likelihood of such a slip. 

Recently, in the first round of the "Italian Game Battlegrounds" tournament at Chess.com, I tried my hand at playing the Noa Gambit, otherwise known as the Monck Gambit, otherwise known as the Open Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit.

I don't think that my play was anything special, but the historical sidelines are interesting.

Unfortunately, for my opponent, a few poorly-timed "time bomb" moves spoiled his game.

perrypawnpusher - RemoveKubab1
Italian Game Battlegrounds, Chess.com, 2019

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 

The Two Knights Defense.

4.Nc3

Hoping for 4...Bc5, when 5.Bxf7+ would be the Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit.

4...Nxe4 

The Database says that I have reached this position two times previously, each time responding, with 5.Nxe4 - perrypawnpusher - aborigen, blitz, FICS, 2011 (1-0, 20) and perrypawnpusher - aquitanus, blitz, FICS, 2016 (1-0, 42).

5.Bxf7+ 

It seemed like a good idea at the time.

5...Kxf7 6.Nxe4 d5 7.Ng3 

There is a lot of history in the alternative moves, as the following notes will show. I had originally intended to play 7.Neg5+, just because Bobby Fischer once played it. (When he was young.)

7.Neg5+ Kg8 8.d3 (8.d4 h6 9.Nh3 Bxh3 (9...Bg4 10.dxe5 Nxe5 11.Nf4 (11.Nhg1 Bc5 12.Bf4 Ng6 13.Bg3 Kh7 14.Qd3 Re8+ 15.Kf1 Re4 16.Re1 Qe7 17.Qxd5 Rxe1+ 18.Nxe1 Rd8 19.Qc4 Black mates in two moves, Blanchard - Pollock,W, Chicago, 1890) 11...c6 (11...Bxf3 12.gxf3 c6 13.Be3 Bd6 14.Rg1 Kh7 15.Rxg7+ Kxg7 16.Ne6+ Black resigned, Archer,R - Parkins,J, corr, 1908) 12.h3 Nxf3+ 13.gxf3 Bf5 14.Be3 Bb4+ 15.c3 Ba5 16.Rg1 Qe8 17.Nxd5 Qf7 18.Nf4 Re8 19.Qb3 Bc7 20.Qxf7+ Kxf7 21.Nh5 g6 22.Ng3 Bxh3 23.O-O-O Rd8 24.Rxd8 Bxd8 25.Rh1 Bg2 26.Rxh6 Rxh6 27.Bxh6 Bxf3 28.Be3 draw, Fischer,R - Ames,D, Lincoln ch-US jr, 1955) 10.gxh3 exd4 11.O-O Qf6 12.c3 Bc5 13.Qd3 Rd8 14.Re1 dxc3 15.bxc3 Kf7 16.Bb2 Qg6+ 17.Qxg6+ Kxg6 18.Rad1 Rhf8 19.Kg2 Rxf3 20.Kxf3 Rf8+ 21.Kg4 h5+ 22.Kg3 Bxf2+ 23.Kg2 Bxe1 24.Rxe1 Rf5 25.Bc1 Re5 26.Rg1 Rf5 27.Re1 Ne5 28.Be3 b6 29.Bd4 Kf7 30.h4 c5 31.Be3 Nf3 White resigned, Kelemen - Charousek,R, corr, 1893) 8...h6 9.Nh3 g5 (9...Bg4 10.c3 Qf6 (10...Bc5 11.Be3 d4 12.Bc1 Qd7 13.Nhg1 Kh7 14.h3 Be6 15.Ne2 Rhf8 16.b4 Bd6 17.b5 Ne7 18.c4 a6 19.bxa6 Rxa6 20.Ng3 Ng6 21.Ne4 Be7 22.h4 Bf5 23.h5 Bxe4 24.dxe4 Nf4 25.Nxe5 Bb4+ 26.Kf1 Qe8 27.Bxf4 Rxf4 28.Ng6 Rxe4 29.g3 Re1+ 30.Qxe1 Bxe1 31.Rxe1 Qc6 32.Rh4 Qxc4+ 33.Kg1 Qxa2 34.Re8 Rxg6 35.hxg6+ Kxg6 36.Rf4 c5 Black queened in a few moves and White resigned Bird,H - Mills, simul, British CC, London, 1886) 11.Nhg1 Re8 12.Qb3 e4 13.dxe4 Qf7 14.Be3 dxe4 15.Nd4 Ne5 16.Nge2 Nd3+ 17.Kd2 c5 18.Qxf7+ Kxf7 19.Nb3 Rd8 20.f3 Ne5+ 21.Ke1 exf3 22.gxf3 Bxf3 23.Rf1 Be7 24.Ng3 Kg6 25.Bf4 Nd3+ 26.Kd2 Nxf4+ 27.Ke3 Rd3+ 28.Kxf4 Bd6 checkmate, Neidich,G - Marshall,F, Atlantic City, 1920) 10.Nd2 Rh7 11.f3 Bxh3 12.gxh3 Rf7 13.Nb3 Qf6 14.Rf1 Re8 15.Qe2 Re6 16.Bd2 Nd4 17.Qd1 Nxf3+ White resigned, Lenzer -Lasker,E, 1913; and

7.Nfg5+ Kg6 8.Qf3 dxe4 9.Qf7+ Kxg5 White now mates in ten moves 10.d4+ Kh4 11.h3 Bb4+ 12.Kf1 g6 13.g3+ Kh5 14.g4+ Kh4 15.Qb3 Bc3 16.Qxc3 e3 17.Qxe3 Bxg4 18.hxg4+ Kxg4 19.Qh3 checkmate, Pollock,W - Amateur, Dublin, date unknown

7...e4 8.Ng1 g6 

Or 8...h5 9.d4 h4 10.Nf1 Qf6 11.c3 Ne7 12.Ne3 Kg8 13.Ne2 c6 14.h3 g5 15.Rf1 Bh6 16.f3 exf3 17.Rxf3 Qg6 18.b3 Rh7 19.Ba3 g4 20.hxg4 Bxg4 21.Nxg4 Qxg4 22.Ng3 Rf7 23.Bxe7 Rxe7+ 24.Ne2 Qxg2 25.Rf2 Qg1+ 26.Rf1 Qg3+ 27.Rf2 Rf8 White resigned, Noa,J -  Makovetz,G, Dresden, 1892; 

Or 8...Bc5 9.N1e2 Qf6 10.O-O h5 11.Nc3 h4 12.Nxd5 Qe5 13.Nxe4 Qxe4 14.Nxc7 Nd4 15.d3 Qc6 16.Be3 h3 17.f3 hxg2 18.Rf2 Qxc7 19.Rxg2 Nxc2 White resigned, NN-Lasker,E, London, 1900. 

If you are looking for a wild attacking position for White - it hasn't arrived, yet. Black's pawns own the center, and his one developed piece seems better placed than White's one developed piece.

As often happens in a Jerome Gambit, White has to rely on his comfort in unusual positions to make some headway.

[to be continued]

Jerome Gambit: Chaos in a Two Knights (Part 1)

The May, 20, 1899 issue of The Daily Telegraph, of Sydney, New South Wales, carried what it called "A lively game from the recent tourney".

Presenting the contest gives me an opportunity to share some of the delights of doing Jerome Gambit research. It also gives Readers a number of opportunities to try their analytical skills - playing the Jerome, after all, is very much about taking advantage of opportunities as they arise.

(I have changed the newspaper's descriptive notation to algebraic.) 

Dr. Finlay - Elliott, H. E
Dungog, NSW, Australia, 1899

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 

If Dr. Finlay had been looking to play the Jerome Gambit, he got derailed (at least temporarily) by the Two Knights Defense.

This is enough of an issue that it has been discussed a number of times on this blog. For ideas, you could try "Jerome Gambit vs Two Knights Defense" Parts 1, 2, 3, and 4. Follow that up with "Further Explorations" (Parts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5).

4.Nc3

Opening books recommend against this move, as Black has a reasonable response in 4...Nxe4 (temporary piece sacrifice) 5.Nxe4 d5 (recovering the piece), what Hans Kmoch called the "fork trick" in his Pawn Power in Chess (1949). 

4...Nxe4 5.Bxf7+ 

This is may not have been what Black expected.

The Bishop sacrifice goes by different names.

It has been referred to as the Noa Gambit. Charles Thomsas Blanshard, in his Examples of Chess Master-Play (1894) said of 5.Bxf7+ "The text move, a hobby of Dr. Noa, develops Black's game." See Noa,J - Makovetz,G, DSB-07 Kongress, Dresden, 1892 (0-1, 27).

It has also been called the Monck Gambit. In Pollock Memories: A Collection of Chess Games, Problems, &c., &c., Including His Matches with Eugene Delmar, Jackson Showalter, and G.H.D. Gossip (1899), William Henry Krause Pollock gave a crushing 19-move miniature ending in checkmate as "[A] very fine example, known in Dublin years ago as the 'Monck Gambit' ." 

More recently, Rev. Tim Sawyer, of Blackmar Diemer Gambit fame, applied the very apt name "Open Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit".

It is worth mentioning some early games by players whose names have not been attached to the line -

Zoltowski, E. - Zukertort, Johannes, Berlin, 1869: 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+ Kxf7 6.Nxe4 Be7 7.Nfg5+ Bxg5 8.Qh5+ g6 9.Qxg5 d5 10.Qxd8 Rxd8 11.Ng5+ Kg7 12.d3 Nd4 13.O-O Nxc2 14.Rb1 Re8 15.b3 Bf5 16.Rd1 Nb4 17.Ba3 Nxd3 18.g4 Nxf2 19.Rxd5 Nxg4 20.Rbd1 Ne3 21.Rd7+ Bxd7 22.Rxd7+ Kh6 23.Nf7+ Kh5 24.Bc1 Nf5 25.Ng5 h6 26.Rh7 Rad8 White resigned;

Bird, H.E. - Mills, simultaneous exhibition, British Chess Club, London, 1887: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+ Kxf7 6.Nxe4 d5 7.Neg5+ Kg8 8.d3 h6 9.Nh3 Bg4 10.c3 Bc5 11.Be3 d4 12.Bc1 Qd7 13.Nhg1 Kh7 14.h3 Be6 15.Ne2 Rhf8 16.b4 Bd6 17.b5 Ne7 18.c4 a6 19.bxa6 Rxa6 20.Ng3 Ng6 21.Ne4 Be7 22.h4 Bf5 23.h5 Bxe4 24.dxe4 Nf4 25.Nxe5 Bb4+ 26.Kf1 Qe8 27.Bxf4 Rxf4 28.Ng6 Rxe4 29.g3 Re1+ 30.Qxe1 Bxe1 31.Rxe1 Qc6 32.Rh4 Qxc4+ 33.Kg1 Qxa2 34.Re8 Rxg6 35.hxg6+ Kxg6 36.Rf4 c5 Black queened in a few moves and White resigned;

Marshall, Frank James - Pollock, simultaneous exhibition (22 boards) Montreal Chess Club, Montreal 1894: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+ Kxf7 6.Nxe4 d5 7.Neg5+ Kg8 8.d3 h6 9.Nh3 Bxh3 10.gxh3 Qd7 11.Qe2 Qxh3 12.Bd2 Bd6 13.Rg1 Kh7 14.Rg3 Qf5 15.O-O-O Rhf8 16.Bxh6 gxh6 17.Ng5+ Kh8 18.Rdg1 e4 19.Qh5 Bxg3 20.Qxh6+ Kg8 21.Rxg3 Rf6 22.Nxe4+ Kf7 23.Rg7+ Ke6 24.Nxf6 Rh8 25.Nh7+ Ke5 26.Rg5 Nd4 27.Qf6+ Kf4 28.Qxd4+ Qe4 and White mates in two moves, Black resigned

5...Kxf7 6.Nxe5+

Wow.

"Making a sort of Jerome Gambit; interesting, but of course quite unsound" wrote the chess columnist of The Daily Telegraph, properly focused on the Knight capture/sacrifice as well as the subsequent Queen sally.

The Database has only 11 game examples of this move - usually played is 6.Nxe4 - with White scoring 28%. Don't let that discourage you - the current game quickly develops chaotic elements like the traditional Jerome Gambit.  

6...Nxe5 7.Qh5+ Ng6 8.Nxe4

White wants to get his Knight into play. Instead, 8.Qd5+ Ke8 9.Qxe4 might have been a bit stronger, but White might also have wanted to avoid the exchange of Queens that would have followed 9...Qe7. 

8...d6

The Daily Telegraph suggested that 8...Be7 followed by 9...d5 was preferrable, but Black could probably have played 8...d5 directly, or even on the next move.

9.O-O Be7 10.f4 Kf8 

Suddenly, the game is equal.

How can that be? The Jerome Gambit themes are strong: Black's King is on the same file as White's Rook, and the dangerous "Jerome pawn" at f4 is about to advance.

11.f5 Ne5 12.d4 

White could have played 12.f6!? directly, ultimately transposing to the line played.

12...Nd7 

Black has protected the f6 square (four times) from an advance of the White pawn - but it is not enough. He would have done best to retreat the Knight to the f-file, where it would provide some shelter from the enemy Rook: 12...Nf7 13.f6 Bxf6 14.Nxf6 gxf6 15.Bh6+ Nxh6 16.Qxh6+ Kf7 17.Rf3!? and the pressure will force Black to give back a piece, e.g. 17...Bg4 18.Rg3 Qg8 19.h3 Qg5 20.Qxg5 fxg5 21.hxg4 Rae8 with an even game.

[to be continued]

Jerome Gambit: Unreality is Real

Responding quickly to my question concerning the suspect Jerome Gambit game Amateur - Neumann, London, 1880 - almost identical to Amateur - Blackburne, London, 1884 - (see "Jerome Gambit History: Real?") - publisher McFarland and Company forwarded my query to Hans Renette, one of the authors of the forthcoming title, Neumann, Hirschfeld and Suhle19th Century Berlin Chess Biographies with 711 Games.

Mr. Renette was equally skeptical 

 ...I am pretty sure this game was not one played by Neumann (it is not in the book) and, very likely, is a variation of the Blackburne game. Neumann played his last known game in 1872 and afterwards fell into a mental oblivion - he spent the last years of his life in a mental clinic in East Prussia. 

Accidently, this reminds me quite a lot of a game Bird - Pfander, which is at chessgames.com, allegedly played in 1903 (http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1028251) - when Bird was out of public sight. This is game 512 in my book on Bird, and was played in 1879.

For Readers, here is the game, a King's Gambit Accepted, Allgaier Gambit:   

Henry Edward Bird - Pfander
England, 1879

1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ng5 h5 6.Bc4 Nh6 7.d4 f6 8.Bxf4 fxg5 9.hxg5 Nf7 10.g6 Ng5 11.Qd2 Nxe4 12.Bf7+ Ke7 13.Bg5+ Nxg5 14.Qxg5+ Kd6 15.Qc5 checkmate

My thanks to Mr. Renette - author, as well, of H.E. Bird: A Chess Biography with 1,198 Games and the forthcoming Louis Paulsen: A Chess Biography With 668 Games - and the good people at McFarland and Company.

A Propos the Blackburne Shilling Gambit

The opening 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4!? has been named the Blackburne Shilling Gambit, even though examples of Joseph Henry Blackburne playing the line have yet to turn up. Supposedly he would play off-hand games with amateurs for a shilling's stake, and such a trappy line might well speed up the master's collections.

Related to the latter, I enjoy sharing the following, from "The Chess Player" column of Yenowine's News for October 13, 1889. 

Our Milwaukee Chessist Abroad

J. L Garner, who is back from a five months' tour over Continental Europe, has been devoting his spare hours since his return to dealing out bits of precious chess gossip pertaining to his adventures among the chess lions of the Old World. All in all, he managed to win considerably more than half the games. In Paris he played two with Taubenhaus, drawing one. All the big guns were in London during his stay there, and the Milwaukeean met Blackburne, Bird, Mackenzie, Muller, Gossip and a lot of other stars at Simpson's Divan daily. He made even scores with Gossip, winning one, losing one and drawing one. He regards Gossip as below either Elliott or Treichler as a chess player. With Lee, a very strong player ,who beat both Burn and Blackburne, at the Bradford tournament, Garner had a peculiar experience. In one game he mated Lee on the move, and thinking he would not object, offered to let him take the move back. He was fooled in the man, however; he was willing enough to let the game count, and coolly pocketed the shilling which the professionals charge for a "lesson." As a rule, the chess professionals in London and Paris are a dilapidated lot of tramps, with coat sleeves out at elbows, toes projecting from their boots, hats badly caved in and a ghoulish eagerness to fasten upon some wandering amateur, and bleed him at the rate of a shilling a game...

Jerome Gambit vs Two Knights Defense (Part 2)

Readers of this blog may remember that in the 2009 ChessWorld Jerome Gambit Thematic Tournament, GladToMateYou played 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Qe2 fourteen times, winning eight of those games (see "Home Cooking").

Five of those games (GladToMateYou won four of them) continued with 5...Nf6, transposing to a Jerome Gambit / Two Knights Defense line that can arise from the play mentioned in yesterday's post: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Qe2, which can be followed by 4...Bc5 5.Bxf7+ Kxf7 6.Qc4+ and 7.Qxc5. 

The earliest game that I have in my database with 4.Qe2 meeting the Two Knights is Bird - Chigorin, Sixth American Chess Congress, New York, 1889 (although the related 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Qe2 probably goes all the way back to Ruy Lopez), about which Wilhelm Steinitz briefly wrote, in the tournament book, "Not as strong as the authorized move Ng5".

The earliest game in my database with 4.Qe2 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ as mentioned previously (see "Adolf Albin Plays the Jerome Gambit (Part 1)" and "(Part 2)"), is Albin - Schlechter, Trebitsch Memorial Tournament, Vienna, 1914.

The line has surprise value, and, as NiceToMateYou showed, some practical use in club play, but Black has resources (if he can find them) in 6...Kxf7 7.Qc4+ d5! 8.Qxc5 Nxe4! when after 9.Qe3 Re8 Black is somewhat better, and White is scrambling for playable ideas.

Still, none of this dissuaded Bill Wall from playing and winning with the opening this year:

Wall,B - Asesino
Chess.com, 2010

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

4...Kxf7 5.Qe2 Nf6 6.Qc4+ d5 7.Qxc5 dxe4

8.Nxe5+ Nxe5 9.Qxe5 Re8 10.Qb5 Qd4 11.0-0 c6 12.Qb3+ Nd5

White has already achieved an edge in the game.

13.Nc3 Be6 14.Qxb7+ Ne7 15.Re1 Bd5 16.b3 Kg8 17.Bb2 Rf8

For the illusion of an attack, Black surrenders a piece.

18.Qxe7 Qxf2+ 19.Kh1 Rae8 20.Qg5 e3 21.Nxd5 exd2 22.Qxg7 checkmate

Shillings: One Found, Two Lost (Part 1)

Sometime back I contacted Edward Winter, of "Chess Notes" and Chess History fame, with some questions about the origin and naming of the Blackburne Shilling Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4). He posted my query, and recently presented some relevant information. 

3786. Blackburne Shilling Gambit

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

One clue may be that the first edition of Hooper and Whyld’s Oxford Companion to Chess (1984) does not call the line by name, but the second edition (1992) calls it the Blackburne Shilling Gambit. Did the co-authors discover some historical information during that eight-year period?’

6470. Blackburne Shilling Gambit (C.N. 3786)

From page 429 of the December 1897 American Chess Magazine:

"All chess life seems to be with America," writes an esteemed and particularly well-posted English correspondent. "A great change has come over English chess. The 'old masters' are dying out. The new-born strength of amateurs has slaughtered them. They have no prestige. Names once of weight are now spoken of with contempt. No new professionals are coming in – no new Blackburnes or Birds. The 'nimble shilling,' for which the old professionals played at the Divan, is now too hardly earned. The country joskins know the openings and the principles, and instead of Bird's giving a Queen and winning twenty games in an hours, as I have seen ('hoc egomet oculis mei vidi'), he plays on even terms, and of five games wins only the odd one and a shilling. The ancient 'Shilling Gambit' is no longer a thing of dread. Young men from Birmingham walk into the Divan without awe and speak of giving odds. And the late H. Macaulay of this city (now Birmingham) actually conceded the Knight to a master who played and won a prize in the Manchester International, and Macaulay, giving the odds, won a majority of the games." - New Orleans Times-Democrat.

Jerome Gambit is for the Bird[s]

In his Modern Chess and Chess Masterpieces (1887), Henry Bird addresses his defense to the Ruy Lopez, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nd4 – in a manner that I find parallells my own attitude toward the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+):

I sometimes play this, but not always; it depends upon the state of mind I am in, and whether I want a lively and critical game or a steady contest – one, in fact, in which my adversary considers that I treat him with becoming respect. A well-known and esteemed reverend gentleman once objected that I would not make so silly a move against one of the greatest players.

graphic by Jeff Bucchino, "The Wizard of Draws"