Jerome Gambit: In the Meantime

When the third round games in the "Italian Battleground" tournament at Chess.com began to wind down (two left to complete, one a Jerome Gambit) I went looking for action in the "Italian Game Classic" tournament on the same site.

Round 1, Group 2 matched me with 4 other players - and I was able to construct a Jerome. I admit that I benefitted from giving "Jerome Gambit odds", as well as from my opponent's quick moves, despite the 3 days/move time control. Still, the game had its moments, especially the "throw in the kitchen sink" ending.  

perrypawnpusher - Al-der
Italian Game Classic, Chess.com, 2019

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Kf8 

As I posted about this move, some time ago

As early as his first article with analysis (Dubuque Chess Journal 4/1874), Alonzo Wheeler Jerome considered the possibility that Black might refuse to capture the second piece, and play for King safety instead with 5...Kf8.  

This was, in fact, the defense that Jerome, himself, credited to G. J. Dougherty, ("a strong amateur, against whom I first played the opening") of Mineola, New York, in a yet unfound game; that O.A. Brownson, editor of the Dubuque Chess Journal, played against Jerome in an 1875 game (Dubuque Chess Journal3/1875); that magazine editor William Hallock used against D.P. Norton in an 1876 correspondence game played “by special request” to test the gambit (American Chess Journal 2/1877); that William Carrington tried in his 1876 match vs Mexican Champion Andres Clemente Vazquez (Algunas Partidas de Ajedrez Jugadas en Mexico, 1879); and which Lt. Soren Anton Sorensen recommended as “more solid and easier to manage” in his seminal Jerome Gambit essay (Nordisk Skaktidende 5/1877). 

As I noted: early in the Jerome's Gambit's life, there were players willing to accept one "gift", but who were skeptical of accepting two "gifts".

6.Nxc6

Probably the strongest move, although Bill Wall has experimented with 6.0-0!?, intending to meet 6...Nxe5 with 7.d4.

The Banks Variation, 6.Qh5!?, has scored 18-20-1, but is well met by 6...Qe7!?. See "Jerome Gambit Secrets #4".

6...dxc6

The better pawn capture, as 6...bxc6 would allow 7.d4, right away.

7.O-O

I considered both this move and 7.d3, and decided that castling was going to be necessary, in any event, while, perhaps, it wasn't yet time to give up on the opportunity to play d2-d4. My judgement was almost immediately rewarded.

7...Qh4 8.d4 Bg4 

Played quickly, probably with the idea that you don't always have to defend against an opponent's threat if you can come up with a greater threat. In this case, however, Black has overlooked a resource that White has.

9.f3 Bxf3 10.Qxf3+ Qf6 11.Qd3 

Black's game has come off the rails, quickly.

11...Qxf1+ 12.Kxf1 Rd8 13.Qf3+ Ke8 14.dxc5 Ne7

White has a Queen, Bishop and pawn for a Rook, but he still needs to be careful.

15.Kg1 Rf8 16.Qe2 Ng6 17.Nc3 b5 18.Bg5 Rd7 19.Rd1 Ne5

White's pieces are developed. Now it is time to put them to use: nothing subtle, just throw the pieces at him, especially the Queen and Bishop.

20.Qh5+ g6 21.Qh3 Rff7 22.Qe6+ Kf8 23.Bh6+ Rg7 24.Rf1+ Rdf7 25.Qc8+ Ke7 26.Bg5+ Black resigned

The finish would have been 26...Rf6 27.Bxf6+ Kf7 28.Bg5+ Nf3+ 29.Rxf3 checkmate.

The Jerome Gambit Article (Part 1)

Ten years ago I wrote a substantial article on the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) and submitted it to the German language chess magazine, Kaissiber.  The editor, Stefan Buecker, was supportive, and tried, over the years, to somehow make the submission work. His was a serious and well-respected magazine, however, and even a well-written (and revised) piece on a highly suspect chess opening could not find a place in its pages. 

Kaissiber ceased publication 8 years ago. If you have any interest, at all, in creative chess explorations or chess history - even if German is not your first language - you would do well to track down an issue. I guarantee you will not stop at one.

In the meantime, I thought it might be time to share my Jerome Gambit explorations. (I have occasionally sampled from it, but never shared the whole thing.) The article is a bit long, and will take up a number of blog posts, but, believe it or not, there is a lot of ground to cover.

Jerome Gambit theory has progressed since the article was written, but it is important to learn the opening's history.

The Jerome Gambit

Introduction

If you page through Raymond Keene’s The Complete Book of Gambits (1992) you will find a short entry for the Jerome Gambit: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 and a dour assessment “This is totally unsound and should never be tried!”

Keene’s warning notwithstanding, the Jerome Gambit has an interesting history.

History

The April 1874 edition of the Dubuque Chess Journal (also known as the American Chess Journal, or the Journal) contained a small article titled "New Chess Opening.” It began “We have received from A.W. Jerome of Paxton, Ford county, Illinois, some analyses of a new move in the Giuoco Piano, first played by him, which we offer our readers as: Jerome's Double Opening.”

            There followed a brief analysis:

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ This is the first move, if

now Black reply 4...Kxf7 he continues 5.Nxe5+ and we have the moves

that constitute Jerome's Double Opening.

Suppose in the first place 5...Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4
Qf6 9.fxe5+ Qxe5 10.Qf3 Nf6 11.d3 compelling either K or Q to move

as White threatens Bf4; or Black can play ...g5. If 11...Ke7 12.Nc3 g5

13.Rf1 c6 14.g3 We have space only for a few of Black's best moves,

leaving our readers to test the opening over the board.

            If 5...Kf8 6.Nxc6 dxc6 (if 6...bxc6 White plays 7.d4 putting

Black's KB out of play) 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Qf3 Qd4 9.d3 Bg4 10.Qe3 Qxe3

11.Bxe3 Bxe3 12.fxe3 Ke7 and White should draw by the judicious use

of his pawns.

             The editor of the Dubuque Chess Journal, O. A. Brownson, found the Double Opening interesting enough, or amusing enough, to run further analyses (and a game) by Jerome in the July 1874 issue and in the January 1875 issue. In the March 1875 issue Brownson published two games he had played against A. W. Jerome, and in July 1875, he published one more game, all involving Jerome’s Gambit. (In all, White won 2, drew 1, lost 1.)

The Jerome Gambit was apparently well received by the average chess player. Some indication of this was reflected the “Our Portfolio” section of the Dubuque Chess Journal for May 1874, which contained a “Chess Challenge” which looked a lot like a chess duel

George J. Dougherty, of Mineola, Queen’s County, New York,

hereby respectfully invites John G. Belden, Esq., of Hartford, Conn.,

to play him two games of chess by Postal Card, at his convenience,

Mr. Belden taking the attack in one game and Mr. Dougherty in the other;

the object being to test the soundness of JEROME’S DOUBLE OPENING,

published in the April No. (50) of this CHESS JOURNAL.

            It is not likely that any of the Journal’s readers were aware that the player issuing the challenge was the first person against whom Jerome had played the Double Opening!

            As early as July 1874 it was clear that Alonzo Wheeler Jerome had no illusions about his gambit, as the Dubuque Chess Journal noted

It should be understood that Mr. Jerome claims in this New

Opening "only a pleasant variation of the Giuoco Piano, which may

win or lose according to the skill of the players, but which is capable

of affording many new positions and opportunities for heavy blows

unexpectedly."

            This modesty did not prevent Jerome from debating for months with William Hallock, who produced the American Chess Journal in the years following the demise of the Dubuque Chess Journal. While testing his invention in over-the-board and correspondence play, Jerome claimed

                        …that the opening has a “reasonable chance of winning,”

            which is sufficient to constitute a “sound opening.” It is not required

            that an Opening shall be sure to win. There is no such opening

            contained in chess; at least none that I know of.

            In the exchanges of games and analysis that appeared in the ACJ in 1876 and 1877, Hallock progressed from referring to “Jerome’s Double Opening” to “Jerome’s Gambit” to “Jerome’s Absurdity.”

[to be continued]

Merry Christmas! (A Hysterical/Historical Jerome Gambit, Part 1)

Season's Greetings to the Jerome Gambit Gemeinde, and readers everywhere! 

Below is my latest Jerome Gambit game, which includes the "gift" of annotations from the article submitted (and revised, and revised, and revised, and revised, and reassessed) to Stefan Bucker for his magazine Kaissiber. [There is a ton of interesting reading to be found in the above links - and the links below, as well - although I still have not been able to definatively link Alonzo Wheeler Jerome to Winston Churchill.]

perrypawnpusher  - spince

blitz, FICS, 2013

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

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Kf8

I have faced this defense 16 times, scoring 12 points - 75%, which is still a bit short of my overall Jerome Gambit score of 82% (regular Jerome Gambit 83%, Semi-Italian Jerome Gambit 90%, Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit 74%, Semi-Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit 77%).

As early as his first article with analysis (Dubuque Chess Journal 4/1874), Alonzo Wheeler Jerome considered the possibility that Black might refuse to capture the second piece, and play for King safety instead with 5...Kf8. 

This was, in fact, the defense that Jerome, himself, credited to G. J. Dougherty, ("a strong amateur, against whom I first played the opening") of Mineola, New York, in a yet unfound game; that O.A. Brownson, editor of the Dubuque Chess Journal, played against Jerome in an 1875 game (Dubuque Chess Journal 3/1875); that magazine editor William Hallock used against D.P. Norton in an 1876 correspondence game played “by special request” to test the gambit (American Chess Journal 2/1877); that William Carrington tried in his 1876 match vs Mexican Champion Andres Clemente Vazquez (Algunas Partidas de Ajedrez Jugadas en Mexico, 1879); and which Lt. Soren Anton Sorensen recommended as “more solid and easier to manage” in his seminal Jerome Gambit essay (Nordisk Skaktidende 5/1877).

It is interesting that early in Jerome's Gambit's life, there were players willing to accept one "gift" but who were skeptical of accepting two "gifts".

6.Nxc6

Bill Wall has experimented with 6.Nd3 in Wall,B - Tim93612, Chess.com, 2010 (1-0, 36) and 6.0-0 in billwall - DeDrijver, Chess.com, 2012 (1-0, 20).

White also has the option of playing 6.Qh5, the Banks Variation, as in Banks - Rees, Halesowen, 2003, when Black can transpose with 6…Nxe5  as recommended by the American Chess Journal, (3/1877) - "The continuation adopted by Jerome, Qh5 looks promising."

Pete Banks ("blackburne" online), a stalwart member of the Jerome Gambit Gemeinde (and still the strongest player I know who has played the Jerome regularly over-the-board in rated contests), brought international attention to Alonzo Wheeler Jerome's invention by writing to International Master Gary Lane, who commented at length on the opening, and on a couple of Banks' games, in his March ("The Good Old Days") and April ("Chess Made Easy") 2008 "Opening Lanes" columns at ChessCafe.com. IM Lane also mentioned one of Banks' games in his The Greatest Ever chess tricks and traps (2008), which reprised some of the earlier material.

It is humorous to note that in his "Opening Lanes" column Lane wrote, after 5.Nxe5+, "I think anyone with good manners playing Black would now kindly ask their opponent if they wanted to take their move back" while in his book he changed this to "I think anyone with good manners playing Black would now go to another room to carry on laughing."

Apropos the Banks Variation itself (i.e. playing 6.Qh5 in response to 5...Kf8), IM Lane noted in "The Good Old Days" that "6...Qe7 is a good alternative [to 6...Qf6 of Banks - Rees], because it stops the checkmate and protects the bishop on c5."

A few months later, 6...Qe7 was tested successfully in a GameKnot.com game, splott - mika76, 2008: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Kf8 6.Qh5 Qe7 7.Ng6+ hxg6 8.Qxh8 Qxe4+ 9.Kf1 Qd4 10.Ke1 Qxf2+ 11.Kd1 d6 12.h3 Qxg2 13.Re1 Qf3+ 14.Re2 Bf2 15.d3 Nd4 16.Nc3 Qh1+ 17.Kd2 Nf3 checkmate. Clearly White, the very-slightly-higher rated player, was taken aback by the move. I asked mika76 if he had been influenced by IM Lane's recommendation, but he said he had come up with the move himself.

6...dc

Jerome, in his 1874 analysis, gave 6…bc 7.d4 “putting Black’s KB out of play”. This was supported by, among several games, perrypawnpusher - mika76, GameKnot.com, 2008 (1-0, 18)

[To Be Continued on New Year's Day.] 

[Comments and Emails are Welcomed and Encouraged.]

Near Miss

A couple of years ago I suggested the George J. Dougherty Club, with special membership for those chess players who had suffered the ignominity of losing to the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) - like Mr. Dougherty, who was the first one to face Alonzo Wheeler Jerome's gambit, and the first one to fall to it.

In light of my most recent Jerome Gambit, I was thinking of suggesting a "club" for those who play the Jerome, and who lose spectacularly with it. Then I thought again, and realized that the oft-refuted opening is supposed to fail gloriously for White, so such a club would "honor" more of "dog bites man" than "man bites dog."

Still, the following game is likely to cause members of the Jerome Gambit Gemeinde to howl... 


perrypawnpusher - darkwight
blitz, FICS, 2013

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 

7.Qd5+ Ke8 8.Qxc5 d6 9.Qe3 Ne5 

Certainly a provocative move, now, or a move or two later.

10.0-0

The Database shows a couple of alternatives: 10.d4 Ng4 11.Qg3 N8f6 12.f3 Qe7 13.0-0 Nh6 14.Nc3 Bd7 15.Bg5 Nf7 16.Nd5 Qd8 17.Bxf6 gxf6 18.Qg7 Be6 19.Nxf6+ Ke7 20.b3 Qf8 21.Qxf8+ Raxf8 22.Nh5 Ng5 23.h4 Nf7 24.Nf4 Bc8 25.Nd5+ Kd8 26.c4 c6 27.Nc3 Nh6 28.g4 Bxg4 29.fxg4 Nxg4 30.Rxf8+ Rxf8 31.Rf1 Rg8 32.Rf4 Ne5+ 33.Kf1 Nd3 34.Rf7 Kc8 35.Rxh7 Rf8+ 36.Ke2 Nf4+ 37.Kf3 Nd5+ 38.Kg4 Nxc3 39.e5 dxe5 40.dxe5 Ne4 41.h5 a5 42.h6 Nc5 43.Kg5 Ne4+ 44.Kg6 Rg8+ 45.Kf7 Rd8 46.Rg7 Rd7+ 47.Kg6 Black resigned, MrJoker - DanK28, Internet Chess Club, 2011; and

10.f4 as in perrypawnpusher - GabrielChime, blitz, FICS, 2009 (1-0, 21). 

10...Qh4 

Less aggressive were: 10...h6 11.d4 Nc6 12.f4 Nge7 13.Bd2 a6 14.d5 Nb8 15.c4 Bd7 16.Bc3 Rg8 17.Rf3 Black resigned, MrJoker - Melbourne, Internet Chess Club 2011; and

10...Nf6 as in perrypawnpusher - mikelars, blitz, FICS, 2010 (1-0, 26).

11.d4 Ng4 12.Qf4 N8f6 13.h3 Nh5 14.Qf3 Rf8 15.Qe2 Nf4

Black has whipped up an initiative, and his 4 attacking pieces are really looking scary. For some reason, I didn't think that my opponent could play his last move, and it caused me some surprise - followed by panic.

16.Qb5+

I was totally embarrassed after the game to realize that 16.Bxf4 was perfectly playable here, and White can continue to defend, e.g. 16...Rxf4 17.Nc3 Nxf2 (retreating the Knight allows White to fork the Rook and Queen with g2-g3) 18.Rxf2 Rxf2 19.Qxf2 Qxf2+ 20.Kxf2 and White is a pawn up.

16...Bd7 17.Qxb7  

Now Black concludes his attack.

17...Nxh3+ 18.gxh3 Nxf2 

Horrors!

The right move was 18...Rxf2!, when 19.Qxa8+ Kf7 20.Qd5+ Kf8 21.Qa8+ Be8 22.Qxe8+ Kxe8 23.Be3 Qg3+ 24.Kh1 Rh2 is checkmate.

Smashing! 

19.Qxa8+ Ke7 20.Qxf8+ Kxf8 21.Rxf2+ 

Now White has two Rooks, a Knight and a pawn for his Queen, and should win - if he avoids time trouble.

21...Kg8 22.Bf4 Bxh3 23.Nc3 Qg4+ 24.Kh2 Qd7

Both of us were bothered by the ticking clock. I was trying not to get checkmated before I got my troops assembled, and my opponent was trying to create as much mischief as possible. Neither one of us were at our best for the rest of the game.

25.Bg3 h5 26.Rg1 g5 27.e5 h4

Advancing pawns against the enemy King is fun, but this overlooks something essential.

28.Bxh4 dxe5 29.Rxg5+ Kh7 30.Rg3 exd4 31.Rxh3 Qd6+ 

A final slip.

32.Bg3+ Black resigned

The Classics I (a first look)

In recent posts I have suggested that those who play, and those who face, the Jerome Gambit, would benefit from becoming familiar with "the classics" of that line.

That got me thinking: What would those classics be?

I have come up with a preliminary sketch. I think all of the games (except one) have appeared on this blog.

0. Jerome - Dougherty

Alonzo Wheeler Jerome has written that his first Jerome Gambit was played against George Dougherty. Although I have not yet been able to find the game, it most likely occurred before the April, 1874 issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal, where the first analysis of the Jerome Gambit was presented. Of Dougherty I know little, but the following notice occurred in the Dubuque Chess Journal, May 1875

Our Portfolio
Chess Challenge
George J. Dougherty, of Mineola, Queen's County, New York, hereby respectfully invites John G. Belden, Esq., of Hartford, Conn., to play him two games of chess by Postal Card, at his convenience, Mr. Belden taking the attack in one game and Mr. Dougherty in the other; the object being to test the soundness of Jerome's Double Opening, published in the April No. (50) of this Chess Journal.


1. Jerome - Shinkman, Iowa, 1874

The first published Jerome Gambit played by Jerome that I have been able to uncover (in the July issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal) was a loss by White.

2. Jerome - Whistler, correspondence, 1876

Largely lost to the chess-playing public, the correspondence match between Jerome and Lt. G.N. Whistler (one game survives) tested the latter's defense to the Jerome Gambit. Alas, a crushing defeat for White - who rarely, if ever, seemed to remember to mention the line thereafter.

3. Vazquez - Giraudy, exhibition, Mexico, 1876

In perhaps the most outrageous Jerome Gambit played, the Mexican champion, giving Rook odds, checkmated his opponent in 18 moves.

4. Vazquez - Carrington, 2nd Match, Mexico, 1876

This is actually a "composite" listing, as the Mexican champion played the Jerome Gambit three times (games 1, 5 and 9) in his match with William Carrington, winning them all.

5.  D'Aumiller - A. P., Livorno, 1878


This miniature played in Livorno, Italy - lasting 19 moves, at which point White announced a mate in 4 - was published in the May 1878 issue of Nuova Rivista degli Scacchi, showing that the Jerome Gambit had already hurdled the ocean.

[to be continued]

Something more embarassing than...

If there is something more embarassing than losing to the Jerome Gambit (even if you do not merit entry to the "George J. Dougherty Club") it has to be giving "Jerome Gambit odds" in a game, having your opponent put his Queen en prise, and you missing the capture... The saving grace in the following game is that I still had a strong game after my opponent's slip and my blunder, and I was still able to bring the point home.

perrypawnpusher  - cinamon
blitz, FICS, 2011

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6

The Semi-Italian Opening.

4.0-0 Nf6 5.Nc3 Bc5

The Semi-Italian Four Knights Game. An earlier game of ours had continued 5...a6 6.a3 Bc5 7.Bxf7+, perrypawnpusher - cinamon, blitz, FICS, 2010 (1-0, 28)

6.Bxf7+

The Semi-Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit.

6...Kxf7 7.Nxe5+ Nxe5 8.d4 Qe7

Earlier this year perrypawnpusher - cinamon, blitz, FICS, 2011, continued instead with the equally strong 8...Bxd4, etc (1-0, 25).

9.dxc5 Qxc5 10.Be3 Qc4 11.f4 Qxe4

This move totally shocked me. I remember thinking: I had NO IDEA that he could play that move! And now my Bishop is hanging!! How did I ever overlook that move??

12.Re1

Of course, after I quickly protected my Bishop, I realized why I had considered 11...Qxe4 impossible: because the pawn was protected by my Knight!

12...Qf5 13.fxe5 Qxe5

I took  a deep, calming breath, and realized that while I was a pawn down, I had plenty of compensation in terms of better development and my opponent's uneasy King.

All I had to do was keep that panic-filled voice in the back of my head (What if you lose this game?? What a humiliation!!) quiet.

14.Bd4 Qd6

Protecting his Knight, possibly thinking to exchange Queens if I move my Bishop, maybe even thinking of sneaking in ...Ng4. He blocks the d-pawn and delays his development, however.

15.Ne4 Nxe4

"Chopping wood" is one defensive strategy, but here it helps me activate my Rook and exposes a future weak point at g7.

16.Rxe4 Rf8

Given enough time, Black hopes to get his King to safety.

However, he does not have enough time.

17.Qf3+

Even stronger was 17.Qg4, threatening mate at g7. Mate follows the defensive try 17...Rg8: 18.Qh5+ g6 19.Qf3+ Qf6 20.Qxf6#

The tricky part of 17.Qg4 is to see that after 17...g5, White still has 18.Qh5+ Kg8 19.Rf1 and there are too many pieces bearing down on the Black King to escape mate, even if Black exchanges Rooks.

17...Kg8 18.Qb3+ Kh8 19.Rd1

Switching to harassing the Queen (20.Rg4 focused on the King). My opponent must have been running short of time, and I gave him more to think about.

19...Qg6 20.Re3 b6 21.Rg3 Black resigned

George J. Dougherty Club Members (Early Years)

"The George J. Dougherty Club" was recently established, along the lines of the "Vera Menchik Club" – the latter reserved for male chess players who, despite their airs of superiority, lost to the women's World Champion, between the World Wars  – to acknowledge those who have lost to the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+), starting with Mr. Dougherty, who Alonzo Wheeler Jerome named as his first victim.

OG (Original Gamester) members include Dougherty (1874?), O.A. Brownson (1875), Morton B. Pane (1878), Daniel Jaeger (1879), J.K. Zimmerman (1880) and numerous unnamed Amateurs, all who had the notoriety of losing to Jerome, himself, and his Gambit.

As my researches continue, I will add further names.

Special mention must be made of William Carrington, who, in his second match against the Mexican Champion, Andres Clemente Vazquez, in 1876, faced and surrendered to the Jerome Gambit three times.

Likewise, M. Giraudy must be singled out for recognition as the first known player to face the Jerome Gambit in an odds game (odds of Queen Rook) in 1876, again played by Andres Clemente Vazquez, only to lose in under 20 moves. 

The George J. Dougherty Club

Vera Menchik (1906 - 1944), the world's first women's chess champion, also competed in chess tournaments against men.

In 1929, Albert Becker jokingly suggesting that any player that she defeated in tournament play should be granted membership in "The Vera Menchik Club".

Of course, Becker became the first member of the "club", which came to include such noted players as C.H.O.D. Alexander, Edgar Colle, Max Euwe, Harry Golombek, Mir Sultan Khan, Jacques Mieses, Philip Stuart Milner-Barry, Karel Opočenský, Samuel Reshevsky, Friedrich Sämisch,  Lajos Steiner,  George Thomas, William Winter,  and Frederick Yates.

I mention this bit of chess history because of a current discussion of the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) taking place at Chess.com, where members have weighed in with various levels of skepticism:

There is very little chance of succeding with that gambit

I suggest you find something better

White has nothing

the gambit is completely unsound

not a variation to take anyone's game forward

simply throws away two minor pieces

unless your opponent is a child and you are playing a bullet game on Halloween, it doesn't look like a wise opening choice

an unsound gambit

You may surprise some in bullet, that's all

Those were the polite comments, mind you.

Anyhow, I thought it was time for me to inaugurate "The George J. Dougherty Club".

In the March 1877 American Chess Journal, Alonzo Wheeler Jerome reminisced that he had first played his gambit (successfully, too) against G.J. Dougherty of Mineola, New York, "a strong amateur".

That makes it interesting to recall that while it was in the April 1874 issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal that Jerome's "New Chess Opening" was first announced, the very next month's Journal carried this notice

Chess Challenge

George J. Dougherty, of Mineola, Queen's County, New York, hereby respectfully invites John G. Belden, Esq., of Hartford, Conn., to play him two games of chess by Postal Card, at his convenience, Mr. Belden taking the attack in one game and Mr. Dougherty in the other; the object being to test the soundness of Jerome's Double Opening, published in the April No. (50) of this Chess Journal. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+

Mr. Dougherty, it seems, was willing to see what he could do to add other players to the growing list of those who had lost to the Jerome Gambit.

It is fitting that we name a "club" after him.

The Norton - Hallock Game (Part 3)

While it can be fun to read contemporary analyses of a chess game (see "The Norton - Hallock Game" Part 1 and Part 2), the personal involvement of the commentators / players can get in the way. 

I sat down with my friend Rybka and my ChessBase files to go over this particular Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) game and evaluate what American Chess Journal editor William Hallock and gambit originator Alonzo Wheeler Jerome had to say about it.

Norton,D.P. - Hallock,W.A.
correspondence, 1877

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Kf8

Hallock: The usual continuation is 5...Nxe5 but this seems equally good.

Jerome: Note (a) to your game with Norton says 5...Kf8 "seems equally good with 5...Nxe5" which is a mistake in fact and theory. 5...Nxe5 if properly followed up wins White's KBP, wheras 5...Kf8 leaves White's pawns intact while Black has lost two strong pawns and doubled another. This defense was adopted by G.J. Dougherty of Mineola, NY, a strong amateur, against whom I first played the opening, and I think he will agree that 5...Kf8 is not a good defense. He generally played 6...bc [after 5...Kf8 6.Nxc6] and that was the play of Mr. J. C. Young of Danville, KY, who subsequently abandoned the game. Why, I do not know, as it was not necessarily lost to either of us. It is a question with which Pawn it is best to take.

It is interesting to point out that this "discussion" between Hallock and Jerome about the merits of 5...Kf8 took place in the February and March 1877 issues of the American Chess Journal, two months before Lt. Sorensen published his very influential article on the Jerome Gambit in the May 1877 issue of the Danish chess magazine Nordisk Skaktidende. (For a taste of the article, see "Bashi-Bazouk Attack".)

It is quite possible that the Americans only became aware of Sorensen's work when his article was translated into English and was reprinted in the August 1877 issue of the Chess Player's Chronicle.

Sorensen considered 5...Kf8 the best defense for Black, and he recommended it as "more solid" and "easier to manage" than 5...Nxe5. After 5...Kf8 6.Nxc6 he gave the 6...dxc6 capture as best, continuing 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Qf3, as in Jerome - Brownson, USA 1875 (1/2-1/2, 28)

A modern assessment supports Sorensen's (and thus, Hallock's) point of view – but only marginally. After four moves Black already has enough material to win the game, and therefore he does not need to complicate the game further by grabbing another piece with 5...Nxe5. The Danish author was already being influenced by Steinitz's "positional" style, as opposed to his (and the chess world's) earlier "romantic" (attacking) style.

On the other hand, Rybka shows a clear preference for 5...Nxe5 over 5...Kf8 (by about 3/4 of a pawn) – showing that even with its positional "insights" the computer software still has a materialistic side.

6.Nxc6

Hallock: The continuation adopted by Jerome, 6.Qh5 [instead] looks promising.

Jerome: The move suggested in note (b) 6.Qh5, is not my idea, but belongs to Mr. Norton himself, and I have to acknowledge that I thought it unsound when he suggested it to me, during the process of the game, because 6...Qf6 gets up a counter attack at once; but 7.Ng4 compels Black to "crawfish" and permits White to castle with a good game. However if Black play 7...Qe7 it makes White 's game uncomfortable. But White may play 7.Nxd7+ Bxd7 8.Qxc5+ with 3 Pawns for his Knight which the books hold to be an equivalent. And I would not hesitate to exchange Queens if offered. Norton thinks [5...Kf8 6.Qh5] 6...Qe7 best; I think [5...Kf8 6.Qh5] 6...Nxe5 best; if 7.Qxe5 Qe7.

The variation 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Kf8 6.Qh5, which was mentioned by Brownson in the March 1875 issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal, while commenting upon Jerome - Brownson, USA, 1875 (1-0, 28), is currently known as the Banks Variation, after the game Banks - Rees, Wolverhampton, 2003 (1-0, 45).

Jerome's mention of 5...Kf8 6.Qh5 Qf6 7.Ng4 Qe7 is a red herring, as his later suggestion of 7.Nxd7+ Bxd7 8.Qxc5+ – a line which Banks successfully followed against Rees – gives White comparatively better prospects.

Modern theory holds 6...Qe7 to be the best response to 6.Qh5.

6...dxc6 7.0-0 Nf6 8.e5

Jerome: Norton's first mistake was in playing 5.e5 instead of 5.Qf3 as in game 472, Dubuque Chess Journal where the defense was the same.

8...Bg4

Hallock: An excellent move cramping White's game and enabling Black to optimally deploy his forces.

Jerome: Ending notes (c) and (d) at the first glance, seems as safe as endorsing U.S. Treasury notes, but closer examination will show that 8...Bg4 loses Bishop as I think I will prove in the correction of note (f).

White's 8.e5 was an error – one that Sorenson made note of in his Nordisk Skaktidende article, giving "8.e5 Bg4 9.Qe1 Kf7!", showing that he was likely aware of this Hallock - Norton game.

The above-mentioned Jerome - Brownson, USA, 1875 game continued with 8.Qf3, better than Norton's 8.e5, but not as strong as 8.d3 (which would show up a couple of years later in Lowe - Parker, England, 1879 – one of the games recently supplied by Senior International Master of Correspondence Chess Tim Harding). Nonetheless, even after 8.d3 Black would retain the advantage.

Hallock's response, 8...Bg4, is a good move, as he maintains, with positional strengths; although Rybka sees 8...Ng4 as a bit less than 1/2 a pawn better.

We will tackle Jerome's argument that "8...Bg4 loses [the] Bishop" in tomorrow's post.

[to be continued]