Jerome Gambit: Down the Rabbit Hole, Again (Part 5)

[continued from the previous post]

Robey, James - Steinitz, William
London, 1865

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4 

The Evans Gambit, again. This time, it is accepted.

4...Bxb4 5.c3 Bc5 6.O-O d6 7.d4 exd4 8.cxd4 Bb6

A position seen multiple times in the Labourdonnais - McDonnell match, as well as in the games of Andersson, Morphy, Staunton - and many others.

9.Nc3 Na5 10.e5 

This move may have been a novelty at the time, although not a strong one - 10.Bd3 was the usual response of the day. Robey seems to have been attracted by the idea of opening up the center while his opponent's King was still in place.

10...dxe5 

Careless. There was nothing wrong with 10...Nxc4 11.Qa4+ c6 12.Qxc4 d5 13.Qd3 Ne7, with a slight advantage for Black.

11.Bxf7+

This is going to hurt.

11...Kf8

Sad necessity. Capturing the Bishop allows 12.Nxe5+ and checkmate will follow.

12.Ba3+ Ne7 13.Nxe5 

13...Qxd4 14.Qh5 Qxc3 

Black grabs a piece and threatens another. He might as well - there is little else to do other than wait for checkmate.

15.Rad1 c5 16.Rd3 

White settles for winning Black's Queen. For now.

16...Qxd3 17.Nxd3 g6 18.Qf3 Kg7 

Diving into danger, but nothing was going to save his game.

19.Bb2+ Kh6 20.Qf6 Nf5 21.Bc1+ Ne3 22.Bxe3+ Kh5 23.Qg5 checkmate

Verdict: Although the game began as a clear Evans Gambit, it is quite possible that A. G. Johnson, in his Oregon Daily Journal claim, might have been so mesmerized by 11.Bxf7+ that he decided to refer to the game as a Jerome Gambit, anyhow.  Of course, describing Steinitz as being "in the zenith of his career as world's champion" would have been an error, as Steinitz had not yet ascended to the throne, by defeating Adolf Anderssen in match play.

Jerome Gambit: Down the Rabbit Hole, Again (Part 4)

[continued from the previous post]

Deacon, Frederic - Steinitz, William
match, London,1862

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4 

The Evans Gambit.

4...Bb6

Declined.

5.b5

While not popular in modern play, this move is, nonetheless, quite direct, and leads to a tactical melee.

5...Na5 6.Nxe5 

There is at least a slight similarity to the play after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 (hoping for the Jerome Gambit) Na5 4.Nxe5 (the "serious" recommendation, instead of Jerome-izing the game with 4.Bxf7+).

6...Bd4

This looks like Steinitz's invention. Opening books at the time recommended either 6...Qf6 or 6...Nh6, when Black might (or might not) have an edge. Today, Komodo 10 shows a preference (32 ply deep) for the Blackburne Shilling Gambit-ish 6...Qg5.

7.Bxf7+ 

Stronger was 7.Nxf7. Now Black slowly outplays his opponent.

7...Kf8 8.Ba3+ d6 9.Bxg8 Kxg8 10.c3 Bxe5 11.d4 Bf6

Black has a piece for two pawns, and can continue to pull his game together.

12.Nd2 Be6 13.Qe2 Qe8 14.O-O Qf7 

15.d5 Bd7 16.Rac1 Re8 17.Qd3 b6 18.f4 Nb7 19.Nf3 h6

Komodo doesn't like this last move, suggesting that it can be answered by 20.e5, with advantage to White. It is fine with 19...Qg6 20.Rce1 h6, (advantage Black) which the game transposes into. 

20.Rce1 Qg6 21.f5 Qf7 22.g4 Kh7 23.h4 g5 24.hxg5 Bxg5 

Taking the Bishop off of the a1-h8 diagonal is a mistake, as White immediatly shows. 

25.e5 Qg8

This does not stop the pawns from advancing, "Jerome pawn" style, as part of a mating attack.

26.e6 Bc8 27.f6+ Qg6 28.Nxg5+ hxg5 29.Rf5 Nd8 30.Re2 Nf7 31.Rxg5 Rhg8 32.Rh2+ Nh6 33.Rgh5 Kh8 34.Rxh6+ Qxh6 35.Rxh6 checkmate

Verdict: interesting game, snappy conclusion - but, all told, not likely to be mistaken as a Jerome Gambit game.

[to be continued]

LAPOC

Just bumped into the website LAPOC - Learn and Play Online Chess, where players are encouraged to "Trip up your opponent with a clever gambit".

Examples are given such as:

"Fry White's Liver in the Two Knights Gambit"

"Fried Liver Attack - Drag the Black King to the Center"

"Counter Attack White with the Dangerous Wilkes-Barre"

"Steal Moves in the Evans Gambit"

and, or course

"Build Rapid Attacks in the Jerome Gambit"

Check it out.

BOOM!

BOOM!

After the previous post I received an email from chessfriend Yury Bukayev who suggested that in the Semi-Italian opening, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6, after 4.0-0 Bc5, along with the Jerome Gambit-ish 5.Bxf7+ White also has the Evans Gambit-ish 5.b4.

He reminded me of two articles that he had written on similar opening lines (see c50 and c51) - well worth a first (or second) look for readers who want to punish the timid 3...h6. Look closely and you will find a number of opportunities for a well-timed Bxf7+, as well!

Thank you, Yury.

BSJG: Reference

I received a short email from chessfriend Yury Bukayev, regarding yesterday's blog post. I have added the relevant link:

Your latest post http://jeromegambit.blogspot.ru/2017/03/blackburne-shilling-jerome-gambit-be.html contains the final attack, that is relative to winning attacks in Evans-Bukayev gambits (for example, III.B2 of my Paragraph 2). It is pleasant to see! 

Best wishes!

Yury

5% New (Part 3)

The following game appeared in Royal Exchange on November 15, 1879. Black, who is associated with the Monck Gambit and who opined negatively concerning the Jerome Gambit, defends against an Evans Gambit with Jerome touches that never gets its attack going. 

Clothier Jr,J - Monck,W
Preston Guardian tourney-1 rd1 corr, 1879
brief notes by G. W. Farrow (columnist) and W. H. S. Monck

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4 

The Evans Gambit.

4...Bb6

Declined.

5.0-0 d6 6.c3 Bg4 7.b5

Farrow gives this a "?" which is a bit harsh, recommending instead 7.Be2. (Stockfish 7 likes 7.h3, suggesting that the text loses about a half pawn.)

 7...Na5 8.Bxf7+ 

GWF: All sound and fury, signifying nothing 

WHSM: An unsound sacrifice 

8...Kxf7 9.Nxe5+ 

GWF: Desperate cases require desperate remedies

9...dxe5 10.Qxg4

10...Nf6 11.Qe2 Re8 12.Bb2 Qd6 13.Na3 Rad8 14.Nc4 Nxc4 15.Qxc4+ Re6 16.d4 exd4 17.cxd4 Nxe4

18.Rad1 Qd5 19.Qa4 Nd6 20.Qc2 Rg6 21.f3 Nxb5 22.Kh1 c6 23.Rfe1 Qxa2 24.Qf5+ Kg8 White resigned

Countering A Gambit With A Gambit

In the following game it is likely that White was expecting an exciting, quick blitz game with a dangerous attack; but he probably didn't expect to be on the receiving end of the aggression.

Philidor1792 again shows that lessons from the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) can be applied elsewhere, even on defense.

guest211 - Philidor1792
blitz 3 0, www.bereg.ru, 2016

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4 Bb6 5.a4 Nf6 

Varying from 5...f5 in guest443 - Philidor1792, blitz 3 0, www.bereg.ru, 2016.

6.a5 Bxf2+

Philidor1792 faced this last year: Philidor 1792 - guest234blitz, 3 0, www.bereg.ru, 2015 (0-1, 19)

7.Kxf2 Nxe4+ 8.Kg1 d5 9.Bb3 Qd6

10.d3 Nf6 11.Bg5 Qxb4 12.Bxf6 gxf6 13.Nbd2 Rg8

14.h3 Be6 15.Kh2 Qf4+ 16.Kg1 O-O-O

17.Qe2 f5 18.a6 b6 19.Ba4 Nd4 20.Qxe5 Nxf3+ 21.Nxf3 Qxf3 22.Rh2 f4 23.Kh1 Qf2 24.Bc6 Bxh3 25.gxh3 Qf3+ 26.Rg2 Qxg2 checkmate

Stir It Up

In earlier posts we have seen Philidor1792 take some ideas from the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) and stir things up with Bxf2+ in other openings on several occasions. The connection between the Jerome and the Evans Gambit has been made - but in the following game we see Black using Jerome ideas for the defense...

guest443 - Philidor1792
blitz 3 0, www.bereg.ru, 2016

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4 Bb6

The Evans Gambit Declined.

5.a4 f5 

6.a5

There is only one good response to Black's pawn strike, and it is the solid 6.d3 but White is not thinking about "solid". 

6...Bxf2+

Stockfish 7's first choice, and the only move that leads to Black's advantage. This has to come as a shock to White - and in a 3-minute game!

7.Kxf2 fxe4 8.Ne1

White's best choice was to borrow a defensive idea from Black in the Jerome Gambit - castling-by-hand - and try 8.Rf1 exf3 9.Kg1 fxg2 10.Bf7+ but the second player would still have the advantage. 

8...Qh4+

The "Jerome Queen"!

9.Kg1 e3 10.Qe2 Qd4 11.c3 exd2+ 12.cxd4 dxc1=Q 13.dxe5 Nxb4

14.Qh5+

Now it is White's Queen's turn, but nothing comes of it.

14...g6 15.Qe2 Nc2 16.Qxc2 Qxe1+ 17.Bf1 Qxe5 18.Ra4 Nf6 19.Nc3 Qc5+ 20.Qf2 Qxc3 White resigned

Jerome Defense to the Evans Gambit

I recently received an email from Philidor 1792 who shared a game of his where his Evans Gambit Declined was met with a Jerome Gambit-style defense. The game became quite complicated, although our hero won in the end. (Ask not for whom the chess clock flags, it flags for thee...)

Philidor 1792 - guest234
blitz, 3 0, www.bereg.ru, 2015

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4

The Evans Gambit. Black declines the pawn.

4...Bb6 5.a4 Nf6

This is risky, but perhaps Black had already planned his sacrifice.

6.a5 Bxf2+

In the only similar game that I have seen, Black avoided the sacrifice: 6...Bd4 7.Nxd4 Nxd4 8.Nc3 O-O 9.d3 h6 10.Ne2 Ne6 11.f4 exf4 12.Nxf4 Nxf4 13.Bxf4 c6 14 Be3 d5 15.Bb3 Bg4 16.Qd2 Re8 17.exd5 cxd5 18.O-O d4 19.Bf2 Be6 20.Bxe6 Rxe6 21.Qf4 Rd6 22.Bg3 Nh5 23.Qxd6 Qxd6 24.Bxd6 Rd8 25.Bc5 Rb8 26.Bxa7 Ra8 27.Bxd4 Rc8 28.c3 Rd8 29.Rf5 g5 30.Rb5 Nf4 31.Rxb7 Nxd3 32.a6 f5 33.a7 Nf4 34.a8=Q Ne2+ 35.Kf1 Rf8 36.Bc5 Ng3+ 37.hxg3 Rxa8 38.Rxa8 checkmate, Ian Rodrigo Sanchez Su - Enzo Quesada, IRT SANTISIMO NOMBRE DE JESUS 2015 -III. 

7.Kxf2 Nxe4+ 8.Kg1 d5 9.Bb3 Qd6 10.d3 Nf6 11.c3 O-O 

Black has two pawns for his sacrificed piece, plus a solid pawn center, good development and a safe King. While Stockfish 6 rates White as about 1/2 a pawn better, the first player's uncertain King and locked in Rook make things anything but easy.

12.b5

Choosing the Queenside to battle. Otherwise, 12.Bg5.

12...Nxa5 13.Ba3

The computer gives a couple alternative lines: 13.Rxa5 Qb6+ 14.d4 Qxa5 15.dxe5 Qb6+ 16.Nd4 Nd7 17.Bf4 c6 18.bxc6 bxc6; or 13.Bc2 Qb6+ 14.d4 Re8 15.h3 e4 16.Ne5 Rxe5 17.Rxa5 Bd7 18.Ra3 Rf5. 

13...Qb6+ 14.Kf1 Ng4 

Things are becoming uncomfortable for White - but, remember, he is a master of the 3 0 blitz game, and, as the Rolling Stones sang, "Time is on my side."

15.Qe2 Nxb3 16.Ra2 Ne3+ 17.Ke1 e4 18.Nd4 Nxd4 19.cxd4 Qxd4 White won on time

My Bodyguard!?

Ah, yes, the second round of the Chess.com Italian Game Tournament. Not a Jerome Gambit in sight, with one White left to come.

The pattern continues: I toss out 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 only to meet 3...Nf6. Carelessly, I continue with 4.Nc3, hoping for 4...Bc5 and then 5.Bxf7+!?. Nope.

In all my games with Black I have played 3...Bc5, willing to face the Jerome, but each time I have been met with 4.b4, the Evans Gambit.

Interesting. My opponents with Black seem unwilling to allow me to play the Jerome Gambit - a technical win for them, at least in theory - because they are afraid I might play the Evans? (There's a joke about the Evans Jerome Gambit around here, somewhere...)

The Evans Gambit, my new bodyguard!

A Lesson Learned From the Jerome Gambit

A few years ago I wrote in this blog

I think if the bodacious Blackmar Diemer Gambit (1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxd4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3) can be referred to as a "high school for tactics" then the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) can at least be dubbed a "pre-school for tactics".
Every once-in-a-while I wonder if playing the Jerome is helping or hurting my chess play. Then I play a game like the following, and I stop worrying (for a while, anyhow).

A recently-completed game in the ongoing Chess.com Italian Game tournament gave me the opportunity to apply something that I learned from the Jerome Gambit to the Black side of the Evans Gambit. Let me explain.

EduardoMilanez - perrypawnpusher
Chess.com, Italian Game tournament, 2015

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4 

The Evans Gambit. We have looked at the Evans Jerome Gambit a good number of times in the past - but not today.

4...Bxb4 5.c3 Ba5 6.d4 exd4 7.O-O Nge7 8.cxd4 d5 9.exd5 Nxd5

10.Ng5 O-O 11.Nxh7 Kxh7 12.Qh5+ Kg8 13.Bxd5 Bg4 14.Qxg4 Qxd5 

As Black I was happy with better development and an isolated Queen pawn to play against.

15.Rd1 Rfe8 16.Be3 Re4 17.Qg3 Nxd4 18.Bxd4 Rxd4 

I was happy to win the pawn, but what was really nagging me was White's Knight still at home on b1, blocking in his Rook at a1. It reminded me of how much trouble Black gets into when he faces the Jerome Gambit, and he doesn't develop his light-squared Bishop, in turn blocking in his Queen's Rook. So many Jerome Gambit attacks have succeeded against defenders who left those pieces in the "garage" too long.

I started playing to keep the Knight buried in my game.

19.Rf1 Rd3 20.Qf4 Re8 21.h3 Re4 22.Qc1 Rc4 23.Qb2 

My next move lets the Knight out, but at a cost.

23...Bb6 24.Na3 Rg3 White resigned

White will have to give up his Queen for a Rook, i.e. 25.Qxb6 axb6 26.fxg3 Qxc5 snagging the hapless steed.

So: I was asking myself at one point in this game "What plan should I have?" and I thought about a lesson I had learned from the Jerome Gambit!

And: perhaps at times in the game my opponent underestimated me - which is also something I have dealt with repeatedly while playing the Jerome Gambit.