Showing posts with label Charousek. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Charousek. Show all posts

Monday, October 7, 2019

A GM Faces the Jerome Gambit (Part 1)

Image result for free clip art chess players

How many players of grandmaster strength have faced the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+)?

I can think of Joseph Henry Blackburne, author of the notorious 1884 dismantling of the opening.


(Please, let's not revisit the "urban legend" that Alekhine lost to the Jerome. Thank you.)


Of course, if we step outside the main lines and include the Open Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit (otherwise known as the Noa Gambit, or the Monck Gambit- 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+ - then we can add , Charousek, Euwe, Lasker, Marco, Marshall, Tarrasch, Teichmann, and Zukertort, for starters.


For today, let's not go there, either.


Still, I have just learned of a Jerome Gambit, played at bullet speed, online, against a grandmaster.


Let me share some recent exchanges of email with the legendary Australian "Cliff Hardy", player of the white pieces. There will be some move references, but do not let them distract you - I will be presenting the game, with annotations, in due time.

Hi Rick! 
Sorry to inundate you with another game but, after playing the Jerome Gambit for years, I finally got my first chance to play a Jerome Gambit against a GM! It was GM Yasser Quesada Perez, from Cuba.  
Unfortunately, I didn't win ðŸ˜­... 
Because GM Quesada Perez is quite new to Lichess - our game was only his 15th bullet game on the site - his bullet rating on Lichess is comparatively low for his standard of chess (his standard FIDE rating is much higher at 2572) and so I expect it will soon probably go a lot higher than it was at the time of this game.
Of course, I replied quickly
Hi, Cliff, 
Very glad to receive your game against Quesada Perez! 
Certainly provides one answer to the question "How would a GM respond to the Jerome Gambit??" 
Of course, it still leaves unanswered things like "How can you play such a coherent game with 1 second a move thinking time?" 
I have been going over the game, and will try to treat it with both a sense of respect and wonder when I post it on my blog - with you, your opponent, and my good pal, Stockfish 10, playing way over my head, it's a bit of a challenge to make sense of, and then share with readers. But, that's the whole point, I guess. 
[Black's 9th move] gave me a chuckle. It's a novelty, according to The Database, although your game later could transpose into a couple of online games from 2017. I can imagine the GM thinking: The only thing wrong with my position is that White may think he has an attack; so, let's exchange queens, and the rest will work itself out. No need for concrete analysis, especially in a bullet game.
Chances are, similar thinking produced [Black's 6th move]. It would be scary think a GM actually had a refutation to the Jerome Gambit in his repertoire. Most likely he thought (or just reacted) he'd settle for something reasonable, and figure the rest out later. I have seen that kind of thinking in numerous defenses to the Jerome - but the players were not super strong, and the "figuring" was much less effective.Stockfish 10 raises it's eyebrows only at [Black's 17th move], and its recommended followup for White is complicated and not at all clear to me, at least at this point - reaching =/+ in some lines, which has got to be the same as "=" in a bullet game (unless I'm playing, when it would be "-++" )
Nice game. Good to see you taking it to "the man". I mean - why not? I would do the same - although the comment was never truer than, for me, "After 1.e4, White's game is in its final throes". 
Thanks for sharing. 
I hope to learn more, and it'll show up in the blog. 
Rick
And Cliff came back with
Hi Rick! 
I was initially afraid you might not want to see the game, as it was a loss where I never really even got a great position, but I was quite excited to finally get a chance to play a GM with the Jerome. I was also quite glad I didn't botch it by just hanging a queen on move 8 or so ðŸ˜‰. 
Yes, I think he made it all up because he seemed to spend a bit more time on the first few moves. Now that Lichess shows move times, I can see that he took a "whopping" 2.0 seconds to play [his 6th move] 😉 , so it was one of his slowest moves in the game ðŸ˜‰. He spent even longer on [his 9th move]  (2.9 seconds on that move) so I guess he was trying to work out some sort of defence that would work best for him, like you said. Unfortunately, I tried to move too quickly and played [my 10th move] there - although who knows, technically [an alternate 10th move] is not that much better a move anyway... 
Yes, I noticed with the analysis that the computer didn't like [Black's 17th move] - but that was way over my head too! ðŸ˜‰ It was good fun to try against the GM and I will try to remember to throw in [the alternate 10th move] next time [his 9th move] is played. 
Also, it shows how there are so many GM's in the world - there's always some you've never heard of - or, at least, I'd never heard of this guy before this game! 
Bye
Me


[To be continued...] 

Thursday, July 25, 2019

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, 188611.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]