Before This Blog Began...

Before I started this blog (see "Welcome") I had a series of Jerome Gambit-related posts at www.chesshistory.com (under the "Puzzles and Mysteries" section) from 11/24/01 to 9/6/04. A lot of topics were explored, and some paths crossed and re-crossed, as I was finding my way in the world of "Jerome's Double Gambit".

Probably the funniest episode was my mis-guided search for the imaginary book All or Nothing! The Jerome Gambit, by Chiam Schmendrick...

Trips to the White Collection in the Cleveland Public Library helped fill in the gaps of my knowledge, as did the contribution of many chessfriends world-wide. 

Following that "debut", I started to find my "voice" in the ChessPub Forum (www.chesspub.com), a discussion forum for ChessPublishing.com, from 1/19/05 to 12/29/07. What began as a series of posts by me, responding to others, quickly became a series of posts by me, responding to me -- and I was eventually dis-invited to continue.

[Although there was a bit of a fall-off from the previous months, the number of visitors to this blog in February 2014 was the best for a February since I began posting. Welcome, again - and many thanks for visiting! - Rick] 

You Knew It Eventually Had To Come To That...

So, I was following a discussion on the ChessPub Forum at ChessPub.com, always an interesting place to visit, when someone posted an innocent question

Seth_Xoma

Senior Member
FIDE Master, 2302 FIDE
and 2328 USCF.

Openings that you would never play

This could have been a poll but the number of possible openings would have been too many.

Anyway, which openings are so distasteful that you would never ever want to play them? For whatever reason?

I'm pretty opened-minded about adopting different openings but I don't think I would ever play the Pirc or the Botvinnik Semi-Slav for example.

For a while, the discussion was serious and thoughtful, with examples like the following

punter
YaBB Newbies

Budapest - 101 ways for white to get better ending
Any kind of scotch gambit/max lange attack etc. where black is better if he knows what he is doing
Pirc - 101 setups for white, all dangerous and black don't have clear way to equalize in neither
King's gambit - black is better
Basically no opening which leads to inferior position if opponent know the theory and no which leads to unpleasant ending out of the opening (even if it's drawable).


LostTactic
Junior Member

The Benoni systems, they're sound as far as I'm aware, but I still don't like the look of the positions they get.
Phildor defence, again don't like the look of the position for black.

The posts poured in. Occasionally you would see someone expressing open-mindedness, followed by someone who showed a limit to that open-mindeness – and sometimes those two "someones" would be the same "someone."
 
Smyslov_Fan
YaBB Moderator
Correspondence fan

I have a friend who's a master. He's made it a point of playing every legal first move in a rated tournament game. Ok, he chooses which openings to play against specific opponents, but I like his courage.

In blitz, I've played all sorts of openings. In tournament and correspondence chess, I don't know. I'm curious to see what Stefan Buecker would say. I doubt I'd ever play the Latvian, even in blitz. Nevermind.... I have played it in training games. Hmmmm.....

Other than that, I need to think about it some more.


Smyslov_Fan
YaBB Moderator
Correspondence fan

I wouldn't play the Transvestite Opening. There are some openings that are an affront to the game, and that's one of them. I also wouldn't play 1.Nf3 2.Ng1.

The latter post prompted some pleasant exchanges, all in the name of good fun (if not necessarily good chess)
 
Zwischenzugzwang
Junior Member

Dear Smyslov_Fan, would you be so kind to fill this gap in my chess knowledge - what is that??


Funky
YaBB Newbies

It's an opening in which king and queen trade spots on the first few moves, i.e. 1.e3 2.Ke2 3.Qe1 4. Kd1. It's playable for both sides, although White can claim a slight edge if you play it as black.


Michael Ayton
God Member

It skirts all dangers, and trousers the full point.


Zwischenzugzwang
Junior Member

Maybe 1.d3, 2.Qd2, 3.Kd1 and 4.Qe1 is more solid, as the king is not so exposed after move 2 !?


Seth_Xoma
Senior Member
FIDE Master, 2302 FIDE
and 2328 USCF.

Chess is all about finding the best move orders.

Some posters gave the discussion question some serious thought, and came back with some serious answers, like

Ty
YaBB Newbies

Here are some off of the top of my head:
As white:
-Grob
-Orangutang
-1.b3
-Annoying 1.d4 systems such as the london, colle, trompowsky, blackmar-diemar, veresov and others where white does not move the c-pawn.
-king's gambit
-caro-kann fantasy variation
-french exchange
-danish gambit, scotch gambit, max lange attack or any of those gambit lines where black is at least equal
-any anti-sicilian apart from maybe the Bb5 sicilians
-exchange slav
-vienna opening
-french advance

As black:
-QGD orthodox
-englund gambit
-petroff
-latvian gambit
-elephant gambit
-scandinavian
-1...b5
-1...b6
-philidor defence
-sicilian four knights
-sicilian pin variation
-mainline french with 3...dxe4
-Lowenthal sicilian
-Czech benoni
-Gurgenidze system of the Caro-Kann

There are probably more that I would not play, but I cannot think of them right now.


Uhohspaghettio
Full Member

Anything where you are relying on your opponent not to play accurately, eg. Elephant Gambit
* Any very sharp flank opening where you are hoping your opponent doesn't know it as well as you do.
* Anything where you do something that your opponent can easily avoid, for example Owen's Defence, Anderson's Opening.
* London System, Colle.


As will happen sometimes, the posts often approached the philisophical, if not the existential, as in

TN
God Member

The list of openings that you would never play is a reflection of the limitations of your playing style and chess culture.

That said, I would never intentionally play bad moves in a tournament game.


BPaulsen
God Member
2288 USCF, 2186 FIDE.

Which is exactly why I wrote earlier I wouldn't play anything that sucks.

If it doesn't suck, I'll play it.


Fromper
Senior Member
GrandPatzer

So what does it say about me that I've actually played half the openings mentioned in this thread?

As to the original question, I have no answer. There are some things I can't imagine myself ever trying, like the Bongcloud Opening, but I could imagine myself maybe trying even the silly stuff once in a casual game just to see what happens. I just can't imagine ever ruling out any possible opening and saying that I'll never play it.

I read along, enjoying myself, skipping quickly over the inevitable squabbles that can threaten to derail, if not destroy, a good discussion, until I ran into the following. You knew it eventually had to come to

SWJediknight
God Member

There aren't many openings out there that I can say I would definitely never play, as although I have a reputation for offbeat gambits (e.g. Göring, Scotch, Albin's, Portuguese/Jadoul, and Blackmar-Diemer) I occasionally wheel out something more mainstream for a change. For example, I recently surprised one member of my local chess club with the continuation 1.d4 d5 2.c4!.

There are certain openings that I seriously doubt I would ever play though:
Fred Defence (1.e4 f5)
Damiano Defence (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f6)
Latvian Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5)
Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+)
Grob (1.g4)
Omega Gambit (1.d4 Nf6 2.e4)


Oh, well, a long time ago I reconciled myself to the fact that not everybody was going to love/like/appreciate/tolerate/avoid denigrating the Jerome Gambit...

The discussion continued in the thread, mostly on topic, with some wrangling over the definition(s) of "gambit", for example.

A highlight for me was a series of posts by Stefan Bücker, editor and publisher of the awesome chess magazine, Kaissiber, who has reportedly been ill of late.

The last post left me smiling. 

Mark Stephenson
YaBB Newbies

For me, the answer depends entirely on the circumstances. In correspondence, I would never play any dicey opening that depends on my opponent not knowing the best replies, since he or she will have access to every book, blog, forum, and database available. In blitz, I will try almost anything. And in classical, I may choose an opening that I ordinarily wouldn't play, if I know that it will really annoy my opponent. For example, as White, I will only play a KID exchange variation against a fire-breathing opponent who hates that.

Jerome Gambit Blog: More Tidying Up

It's time to do a bit more tidying up (see "Jerome Gambit Blog: Tidying Up") on the blog – looking back on older posts and updating things since the last effort...

Relationships with the ChessPub.com forum remain cordial, if distant (see "Jerome Gambit: Duck-Billed Platypus of Openings"). I posted a short message there with a link to this blog, and some people have followed it over, placing the site 13th in referrals to jeromegambit.blogspot.com, according to Google Analytics. Of course the actual number is 1/16 th of those who came over from the Something Awful website (see "Something Awful", "Something Awful Again" and "Return to Awful"), just to keep things in perspective.

"Is it September already?" requires a number of updates. To date there has been no Jerome Gambit tournament in Jerome, Arizona, as far as I know. I still have an observer near the scene, though (see "Driving Distance"). Bill Vallicella's very interesting and ever-challenging Maverick Philosopher website has a new location. A review copy of Benjamin Hale's book Philosophy Looks at Chess has arrived, and when I get past my current writer's block (i.e. spending all of my writing time on this blog, instead of writing reviews for Chessville) I'll have my say about it.

An update to "The Jerome Gambit Gemeinde (modern)" would have to include chessfriend and game-contributor Martin Moller, of Denmark (see "Jerome meets the Elephant", "Jerome Gambit Strikes in Denmark!" and "Deadly Duel in Denmark" ) Unfortunately, the tournament mentioned in "A Jerome Gambit Gemeinde Adventure in Denmark" did not proceed as expected, and it is not likely that we will see further Jerome Gambit games from it.

The possible connection betwen Winston Churchill and Alonzo Wheeler Jerome (see "From the Email Bag...") has been traced a bit. Churchill's mother was the American, Jennie Jerome (Lady Randolph Churchill; 1854-1921). Jennie's father was Leonard Jerome (1818-1891) of New York City fame and fortune. Leonard's father was Isaac Jerome; his grandfather was Aaron Jerome; his great-grandfather was Samuel Jerome. Samuel's father, Timothy Jerome, according to thePeerage, in 1710 "fled from France to England. In 1717 he sailed from the Isle of Wight to settle in Connecticut." Papers from the military records of Alonzo Wheeler Jerome (born in Four Mile Point, New York, see "The Man, The Myth, The Legend...") show that upon his death in 1902, his widow, Jennie Jerome (the name is an interesting coincidence) filed for a survivor pension. One affadavit was signed by Edgar Jerome and Martha Millis, listed as brother and sister of Alonzo, living in Fairfield County, Connecticut. Further research, of course, is needed to make any link, such as an Alonzo Wheeler Jerome-linked homestead in Connecticut.

In a comment to "Why not join in the discussion?" Pete Banks wrote the following:

Hi Rick,

I sent my latest escapade to Gary Lane after I sent it to you, as he'd asked for Jerome examples. Here is the relevant part of his reply: 'Did Rick Kennedy ever have his article published in the Germanmagazine he mentioned called Kaissiber? Anyway, you won't be able to use the opening as a surprise weapon for much longer because in November a winning game of yours is mentioned in my book "The Greatest Ever Tricks and Traps in the Opening" published by Everyman. Cheers Gary'

So a Jerome Gambit is to appear in print! Perhaps we'll get a revival going!

A check of the Everyman Chess website shows that Gary Lane's The Greatest Ever Chess Tricks and Traps is available now. Perhaps it should be included as the next entry in the "Jerome Gambit Scrapbook".

By the way, as for the Kaissiber saga, see "To Infinity... And Beyond! (Part II)", "Breaking News..." and "Jerome Gambit Blog: Tidying Up". I'm still hopeful.

Regarding the "Jerome Gambit and the Perfesser series" Part I, Part II, Part III and PartIV, I have another instructive, exploratory "human vs computers" match coming up, where the protagonist, "RevvedUp" (a pseudonym of my invention), alternates between playing Black and playing White, using the line played by the computer in the previous game as his choice in the current one – thus extending his Jerome Gambit "book" through the use of the computers' praxis...

Jerome Gambit: Duck-Billed Platypus of Openings

I'm having a lot of fun writing for this Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) blog – this is something like my 82nd consecutive daily post – and it's broken me of some bad habits along the way.

For example, for almost three years, starting in mid-January 2005, I was posting in the ChessPub.com forum, primarily on the Jerome Gambit. It is fun today to see that my first post there has been viewed almost 4500 times.

Anyhow, you might imagine that Alonzo Wheeler Jerome's pet variation was not the hottest topic at ChessPub, and often my posts there looked like conversations with myself. Imagine that.

You might even imagine (correctly) that I was using the forum site as some kind of intermittent blog.

Until the day that one of the Powers That Be told me to zip it.

Qué lástima.

I don't hold any grudges, though. I could have copied all of that good content to this site and not even mentioned the 'Pub. Instead, I invite you to stop by at the ChessPub forum and meet some really fine people chatting about some really interesting chess things.

Just not the Jerome Gambit.