In the following game, Bill Wall's opponent plays one of the I-don't-know-how-many refutations of the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+). Then, it is as if he looked up in surprise, wondering What? Are you still here?
Wall,B - Marani,G
Chess.com, 2011
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 Qh4+
This check is the start of a rather nasty refutation of the Jerome, involving a Queen sacrifice and all sorts of tactics. Luckily for the Gemeinde, it is largely unknown outside of this blog.
The earliest example I have seen was in a humorously annotated game of "telephone chess" in the American Chess Magazine of June, 1899.
It should be noted that ...Qf6, without the check on White's King, was suggested by Alonzo Wheeler Jerome in his first article on the gambit, "New Chess Opening" in the April 1874 issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal.
9.g3 Qf6
Continuing in the funny vein, the first example I have seen of this Queen retreat was in a game played by a computer against Jack Young (of "Bozo's Chess Emporium" fame), mentioned in his "Meet Jerome" article in Randspringer #6, 1990 - 1991. It "defused the attack."
10.Qh5 g6
I can imagine Black looking up and saying, to White and his Queen, "Are you still here? Begone!"
11.Qe2
The Queen retreats, properly admonished.
It turns out that Black must lose a piece, anyhow. He decides to do so by tip-toeing his King away.
11...Ke7 12.fxe5 Qxe5 13.c3 Qe6 14.d4 Bb6
White has only a pawn for his sacrificed piece, but he has some compensation in Black's unsafe King and lagging development, as well as in White's pawn center.
If Black is feeling annoyed, that would be compensation, too.
15.Bg5+ Ke8 16.0-0 h6 17.Qf2
Here is another indication that things are not going as Black has planned. The Bishop does not have to retreat, as White is threatening 18.Qf8 mate.
17...Ne7 18.Bxh6 d5
The Bishop can not be captured for the same reason.
19.Nd2 dxe4
Of course, 19...Rxh6 loses the Rook to 20.Qf8+ Kd7 21.Qxh6.
It turns out that Black's only chance to hold onto his edge in the game was 19...Qg8, not the easiest move to find.
20.Nxe4!
It is great to be able to play this kind of move.
20.Qxe4?? 21.Qf7+ Kd7 22.Rae1 Qd5 23.Rxe7+ Kc6 24.Rf6+ Kb5 25.Qxd5+ Ka6 26.Qc4+ Ka5 27.Qb4+ Ka6 28.Qa4 checkmate
It was the star-crossed lover Romeo who opined
What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet.
I chose that reference to reflect the game below, which contains a mis-named line, as well as a choice of moves by me that has the aroma more of a polecat than a fragrant flower...
perrypawnpusher - igormsp
blitz, FICS, 2011
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+
I checked, and this line is given the name the "Young variation" in the Nomenclature that Bill Wall put together for this blog, after Jack Young, the amazing opening inventor of "Bozo's Chess Emporium" fame.
I think I may have misled Bill in the information that I gave him about the line. Young actually faced the move at the "hands" of the Chess Challenger 10 computer in 1979. That might make it look like the "Challenger Variation," but I think that the name more likely should be the "Norton Variation", after the early Jerome Gambit game Jerome - Norton, correspondence, 1876 (0-1, 42).
My error.
However, the move, itself, is not an error. In fact, it is a great way to set a complacent Jerome Gambit player back on his heels.
9.Kf1
While playing the game, I remembered that the main line goes 9.gxf3 Qh4+ 10.Kd1 Qf2 and that I had quickly reached a drawn position in my game against Sir Osis of the Liver in our 2008 ChessWorld game (winning, when he over-reached).
I didn't remember much more.
More critical was 10...Ne7, from the game perrypawnpusher - sjeijk, blitz, FICS, 2011, (1-0, 19) but I was a little fuzzy on the details there, too.
So, hoping to "surprise" my apparently prepared opponent, I opted for Alonzo Wheeler Jerome's choice of moves against D. P. Norton.
Bad idea: the strategy, and the choice of moves.
9...Kc6
Okay.
There are many reasons that the Jerome Gambit will not be mistaken for, say, the Ruy Lopez, starting with the fact that most of the first 10 moves in the Spanish Game have already been mapped out.
My opponent took enough time in choosing his move for me to believe that I had surprised him. His choice, to leave his Knight en prise and tip-toe his King away from the center, is enough for a draw, similar to the Sir Osis game.
10.Qd5+ Kb6 11.Qb3+ Kc6 12.Qxf3
I could have split the point with 12.Qd5+, etc, but I thought that I would see if I could further confuse my opponent. I was betting on my "Jerome pawns" versus his extra piece, but my poor development seriously hampered my attacking possibilities and actually gave Black the better game.
After the game, Rybka 3 suggested that 12.Nc3 a6 13.d4 was the way for White to fight for a possible, slight, edge. Wow.
12...Qf6
I am sure that the poor Queen has been dying to move since Black played 8...Nf3+ instead of 8...Qh4+. Now, however, it will just be dying.
13.e5+ Black resigned
(See, I wasn't being "modest" when I referred to my recent "lucky wins" in "Three Years Running".)
