Showing posts with label Denker. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Denker. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 24, 2018

Evans-ish Abrahams Jerome Gambit

In the previous post (see "Jerome Gambit: Move That Knight!") I shared a couple of outrageous ways (other than sacrificing it at e5) for White to move his King's Knight out of the way in the Jerome Gambit so that his Queen can enter the fray.

Of course, one "solution" is not to put the Knight there in the first place. Consider the Abrahams Jerome Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Bxf7+!?

I consulted The Database, and learned that it has one 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Bxf7+ game by Bill Wall - always a good openings experimenter to check out - played on the internet in 2001. (Even that far back, he played a couple of games with 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+.)

It turns out that at the same time Bill was extending his experiments a bit, as the following game shows.

Wall, Bill - Quianna
Internet, 2001

1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.b4

This move is at least as old as the MacDonnell - La Bourdonnais, London match,1834.

3...Bxb4 4.c3 Bc5 5.d4 exd4 6.Bxf7+



Here we have what might be called the "Evans-ish Abrahams Jerome Gambit", as it is not quite an Evans Gambit without Nf3/Nc6. The game follows MacDonnell - Boden, London, 1869, for 5 moves, but the first game example that I have of the move 6 Bishop sacrifice is from 2000. (Light analysis of the sacrifice is at least as old as Jaenisch's Analyse Nouvelle des ouvertures in the 1840s.)

6...Kxf7 7.Qh5+ g6 8.Qxc5



NM Eric Schiller, in notes to a game (Denker - Shayne, Rochester, New York, 1945) at Chessgames.com, said this position "looks very good for White". (It's probably about even - but for White to reach equality in 8 moves in any kind of Jerome Gambit has got to be very good, right?)

8...dxc3

The kind of pawn-grabbing that is usually punished.

Instead, Stockfish 9 suggests 8...Qe7 - as seen in Delanoy - Kamenecki, Cannes, France, 2000 (1-0, 38) - with an even game. However, Michael Goeller, a Bishop's Opening expert, gives that move a "?!" and prefers 8...Nf6 - no games in The Database - which he gives a "!", with an even game. There doesn't seem to be anything wrong with 8...Nc6 or 8...d6, either.

9.Nxc3 d6 

10.Qd5+

Psychological warfare. Bill has used a similar Queen check in the Jerome Gambit proper to question Black: Do you want to play ...Be6 and give up the b-pawn? 

10...Kf8

Black replies Not quite, and keeps his King off of the a1-h8 diagonal, where one of his Rooks lives, and where White's remaining Bishop might take up residence. Yet, 10...Kg7 might have been a better move.

11.Nf3 c6

Kicking the Queen, instead of focusing on development.

White has ample compensation for his sacrificed pawn (development, Black's unsafe King), and his opponent's next move, a nervous oversight, ends the game.

12.Qd4 c5 13.Qxh8 Black resigned



Monday, September 14, 2009

Not Playing the Jerome Gambit Either


Yesterday's post was enjoyable enough that it was worth looking up another, similar, game in which the first player did not play the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+). Again, Jerome-ish themes echo throughout.


Samuels,L - McCudden,J
Metropolitan Chess League NY, 1925

Notes by Arnold S. Denker unless otherwise indicated, from his "Miniature Games" column in the January 1935 Chess Review (translated from descriptive to algebraic notation)

1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nc6 3.d3 Na5?


4.Bxf7+


4...Kxf7 5.Qh5+ Ke6

If 5...g6 6.Qxe5 winning back the piece with a winning position.

[Obviously Denker expected Black to protect his Rook. Otherwise he would have looked at 6...Nc6 7.Qxh8 h6 8.Bxh6 Bxh6 9.Qh7+ Bg7 10.Nf3, a line Michael Goeller suggested over 70 years later – see "Eric Schiller Doesn't Play the Jerome Gambit". With a Rook and three pawns against two Bishops, White would have a slight edge rather than "a winning position." – RK]

6.Qf5+ Kd6 7.d4
[As we've seen in Schiller - Shipman, New York 1981, 7.f4 was the stronger pawn move – RK]

7...Nc6
8.dxe5+ Kc5

Forced. If 8...Nxe5 9.Bf4 Qf6 [and here Denker wrote "10.Kt-B3!" It is unclear if he meant 10.Nc3! or 10.Nf3! Actually 10.Bxe5+ Qxe5 11.Qxf8+ was the strongest continuation – RK]

9.Be3+ Kb5 10.Qh5


10.e6+ d5 11.exd5 Nb4 12.d6+ Ka6 would also win, but the text move is much finer and wins in shorter order with the continuation Qe2+.

[In response to 10...e6+ Rybka 3 suggests 10...Ka6 11.Nc3 b6 12.0-0-0 Nf6 with a slight edge to Black – RK)

10...Na5 11.Nc3+ Kc6 12.e6 d5

If 12...dxe6 13.Qb5+ Kd6 14.Bc5+ Ke5 15.Be7+ wins the Queen

13.exd5+ Kd6
White now mates in two.

14.Nb5+ Ke7 15.Qf7 checkmate