Jerome Gambit: Balderdash

Not everything that I have discovered in my recent forays into historical research has been of enduring value.

For example, the "CHESS" column ("Conducted by A. G. Johnson") of The Oregon Daily Journal  of Portland, Oregon, for  October 25, 1914 (page 29) has the following

Of the many chess openings in vogue, two are particularly interesting because they are of American origin. The "Jerome Gambit" was first developed in Cincinnati about 40 years ago. S. A. Charles of that city made a thorough analysis of the opening and met with great success in playing the "Jerome" against prominent players. Even Steinitz, then in the zenith of his career as world's champion succumbed in his first attempt to defend the gambit. Although the opening is theoretically unsound, and involves the sacrifice of two pieces for two pawns, the adversary's king is displaced and drawn into the center of the board where all kinds of complications may arise. The following variation of the Jerome, which is rather favorable to white, reveals some of the possibilties of the gambit: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.d4 Bxd4 9.Na3 Ne7 10.Qh3 Qf8 11.Nb5+ Kc5 12.Nxd4 Kxd4 13.Qe3+ Kc4 14.a4 with slight advantage to white.

Where to begin??

Of course, the Jerome Gambit was "first developed" 40 years before the ODJ column was written, by Alonzo Wheeler Jerome of Paxton, Illinois, having published his first analysis of the "New Chess Opening" in the April 1874 issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal.

S. A. Charles, of the Cincinnati, Ohio, Chess Club, wrote opening analyses, first for the Cincinnati Commercial Gazette, then later for the Pittsburgh Telegraph. It is in the latter newspaper that in 1881 he presented his examination of the Jerome Gambit, which later found itself in different chess magazines (e.g. the October 1881 issue of Brentano's Chess Monthly) and opening books (e.g. Cook's Synopsis of Chess Openings, 3rd edition, 1882).
In 16 years of researching and analyzing the gambit, I have not uncovered any game examples (or references) of Charles meeting "with great success" while playing the Jerome Gambit "against prominent players"- or any games of his with the gambit at all. I have found a half-dozen correspondence games where Charles defended against the Jerome Gambit - played by Alonzo Wheeler Jerome. Of course, it is possible that there is much more to be discovered, and I have missed it all, but, still...
By the way, it can be fairly said that Charles regularly acknowledged his games and exchanges of ideas with Jerome; it was only the passage of time that seems to have stripped the inventor's name from certain analyses of his invention.

I was absolutely gobsmacked by columnist conductor A. G. Johnson's contention that Steinitz, "in the zenith of his career as world's champion" actually "succumbed in his first attempt to defend the gambit." With all due respect to Blackburne, whose Queen sacrifice leading to checkmate is probably the best known repudiation of the Jerome Gambit, and to Emanuel Lasker, who - I recently discovered - summarily dispatched the Jerome Gambit in a simultaneous display, a loss by a reigning world champion (not to mention a defensive genius) to the Jerome would be one of the most amazing (and horrible) master games played to date. (There was a note in the Oregon Daily Journal that Johnson, after two years of work, was going to be stepping down after 100 columns, so there is always the possibility that his Steinitz story was a parting little joke; although it did not read that way.)

The analysis that Johnson presents in his column goes back to Freeborough and Ranken's Chess Openings, Ancient and Modern, 1st edition, (1889), although he is more likely to have had the 3rd edition (1903, reprinted 1905) lying around. The move 11.Nb5+ is an improvement over Jerome's 11.0-0 in his analysis in the January 1875 issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal. The concluding evaluation, "slight advantage to white" is too modest - White has a forced checkmate in 6 moves. (It was Black's faulty 10th move that reversed his fortunes.)

Jerome Gambit: Merely Commentators, or Players?

One of the reasons I started a discussion at the English Chess Forum searching out early English game examples of the Jerome Gambit was because of the quote by Joseph Henry Blackburne in Mr. Blackburne's Games at Chess (1899)

I used to call this the Kentucky Opening. For a while after its introduction it was greatly favored by certain players, but they soon grew tired of it.

The issue of the "Kentucky Opening" has been dealt with previously on this blog - see "The Kentucky Opening" parts 1, 2, 3, 4 and "The Kentucky / Danvers Opening".

That the Jerome Gambit had been "greatly favored by certain players" seems to suggest that games should be available - but none new to me have surfaced so far.

Blackburne may have been referring to coverage of the Jerome Gambit in some print sources.

For example, The Chess Player's Chronicle, August 1, 1877, translated and reprinted the early and in depth article on the Jerome Gambit, from "Chess Theory for Beginners" by Lieut. Sorensen, from the May 1877 issue of Nordisk Skaktidende. I believe that the translation was by Rev. C.E. Ranken.

Later, the third edition of Cook's Synopsis of Chess Openings A Tabuled Analysis by William Cook (1882) had Jerome Gambit analysis, including thanks to

Mr. Freeborough of Hull, and Rev. C.E. Ranken, of Malven, for material assistance in the compilation of the tables, original variations in the openings, and help in the examination of proof.

Versions of Chess Openings Ancient and Modern, starting with the first edition in 1889, include Jerome Gambit analysis and suggested moves by Freeborough and Rankin.

It should be noted, too, that George Hatfield Dingley Gossip covered the Jerome Gambit in his Theory of the Chess Openings (1879) and The Chess Player's Vade Mecum (1891). James Mortimer also had Jerome Gambit analysis in the many editions of his The Chess Player's Pocket-Book, starting in 1888.

Freeborough and Ranken, Gossip and Mortimer - merely commentators or players?

The Best Jerome Gambit Game of the Year (Part 2)

We continue from the previous post, considering a game that has lept to the top of the heap for Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) games this year.

As indicated, Readers are encouraged to dispute my assessment by sending in other great Jerome Gambit games...

Wall, Bill - Guest871838
PlayChess.com, 2014

8.Qxh8 

Of the offer of the Rook with 7...d6, Blackburne wrote in Mr. Blackburne's Games at Chess (1899), "Not to be outdone in generosity." The cost to White of taking the Rook is to have his Queen locked out of the action, at a time when Black's pieces begin to swarm the Kingside.

Blackburne's book also contained the following: "NOTE. I used to call this the Kentucky opening. For a while after its introduction it was greatly favoured by certain players, but they soon grew tired of it."

A resonable explanation of the reference to the "Kentucky opening" has appeared previously in this blog (see "A New Abrahams Jerome Gambit" for a summary). 

As for the "certain players" who "greatly favoured" the Jerome Gambit, it is difficult to identify them by games played, as I have discovered the games of only a dozen or so players (other than Jerome, himself) who played the opening between when it was introduced in 1874 and the publication of Blackburne's book in 1899. Andres Clemente Vazquez, of Mexico, has four games in The Database, while E.B. Lowe, of Great Britain, has three.

Blackburne might well have been referring to authors who included analysis of the Jerome Gambit in their opening books, in which case George H.D. Gossip, of Theory of the Chess Openings (1879) and The Chess Player's Vade Mecum (1891) ; William Cook, of Synopsis of Chess Openings (1882, 1888); E. Freeborough and C. E. Rankin of  Chess Openings Ancient and Modern (1889, 1893, 1896);and Mortimer of The Chess Player's Pocket book And Manual of the Openings (1888 - 1906); are all likely suspects. Certainly, more research is still needed.

8...Qh4

This is Blackburne's counter attack, threatening 9...Qxf2+ 10.Kd1 Bg4 mate.

9.O-O

Munoz and Munoz, in their notes to Amateur - Blackburne, London, 1885, in the Brooklyn Chess Chronicle, suggested "He should have attempted to free his pieces by P to Q4 [d4] before castling." 

The move 9.d4 received a good look in "Updating the Jerome Gambit (Part 1)", including references to L. Elliot Fletcher’s energetic Gambit’s Accepted (1954), an internet article on Amateur - Blackburne (not currently available) by Brazil's Hindemburg Melao, and some musings and analysis from Bruce Pandolfini, in his 1989 Chess Openings: Traps & Zaps !

9...Nf6

The door closes on White's Queen.

10.Qd8

Melao mentioned that Idel Becker, in his Manual de xadrez (1974), attributed the move 10.d4 to Euwe (source not mentioned). Melao was skeptical about the move, giving Black’s counter-attack 10…Bh3 11.gxh3 Rxh8 12.dxc4 Qxh3 13.f3 g5 14.Rf2 g4 15. Bf4 gxf3 16.Bg3 h5 17.Nd2 h4 18.Nf3 Qg4 with advantage for Black. He preferred 10.Qd8 - another suggestion (without further analysis) by Munoz and Munoz in the Brooklyn Chess Chronicle, August 1885, who opined "The only hope he had was 10.Q to Q8 [10.Qd8], thus preventing the deadly  move of Kt to Kt5 [...Ng4]."

Bill Wall mentioned that 10.d3 loses to 10...Bh3 11.Qxa8 Qg4 12.g3 Qf3 as was brutally demonstrated in RevvedUp - Hiarcs 8, 2 12 blitz, 2006 (0-1, 12).

10...Bd7

Most consistent for Black is 10...Bb6, covering the c7 pawn and enforcing the embargo on the Queen. White should return a pawn to free Her Majesty with 11.e5 dxe5 12.Qd3 as in Wall,Bill - Foo,Nathan, Palm Bay, FL, 2010 (1-0, 33). 

[to be continued]

Some History of the Jerome Gambit (Part 3)

A bit more history, following yesterday and the day before...

After his March and July 1874 articles in the Dubuque Chess Journal, Alonzo Wheeler Jerome published a third bit of analysis on the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) in the January 1875 issue.

Note that the line introduced in "An Intriguing Letter (Part 1)", including the move 9.Na3, is seen here. In future posts we will follow its progress toward its appearance in Freeborough and Ranken's Chess Openings Ancient and Modern.

Dubuque Chess Journal
January 1875 p.38


"Queen's Gambit in Jerome's Double Opening"


Analysis by A.W. Jerome 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.d4 Bxd4 9.Na3 Ne7 [9...Qf6 10.Nb5+ Kc5 11.Nxd4 Kd6 (11...Qxf5 12.Nxf5 g6 13.Be3+ Kc6 14.Nd4+ Kd6 15.0-0-0 Ke7 16.Nb5 Kd8 17.Bf4) 12.Nb5+ Kc5 13.Qh3 Kxb5 14.Qb3+; 9...Ke7 10.Qh3 d6 11.Qh4+ Ke8 12.Bg5 Nf6 13.0-0-0 Bb6 14.f4 Ng6 15.Qg3 Nh5 16.Qf3 Qd7 17.f5 Nf6 18.fxg6] 10.Qh3 Qf8 11.0-0 Kc6 [11...a6 12.c3 Bb6 13.Qg3 Qf7 14.Bf4] 12.Nb5 Kxb5 13.Qb3+ Kc6 14.Bg5

An Intriguing Letter (Part 2)

This is the first of two games, mentioned yesterday in "An Intriguing Letter (Part 1)" from Филидор1792 . It features a typical Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) battle between White's two "extra" pawns and Black's "extra" piece.



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

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6

7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.d4 Bxd4 9.Na3

This move is mentioned by Freeborough and Ranken in their Chess Openings Ancient and Modern. This game follows one of their notes through the 13th move.

9...c6 10.c3 Qf6 11.cxd4 Qxf5 12.exf5 Nf7 13.Bf4+ Ke7

White has only one pawn for his sacrificed piece, and so muct be worse. However, the game has a long way to go, and each player must make the best of what he has. Watch the first player work with his quantitative majority of pawns on the Kingside.

14.Nc4 d5 15.Ne3 Ngh6 16.g4 g6 17.fxg6 hxg6 18.f3 Bd7 19.Kf2 Raf8 20.Bg3 g5 21.Rae1 Kd8 22.h4 gxh4 23.Bxh4+ Kc8

These "Jerome pawns" give White hope.

24.Bf6 Rhg8 25.Kg3 Nd6 26.Be5 Nhf7 27.Bxd6 Nxd6 28.Rh6 Nf7 29.Rh7 Rh8 30.Reh1 Kd8 31.f4 Ke7 32.f5 Kf6 33.Kf4 Rxh7 34.Rxh7 Rh8

From a practical standpoint, White continues to make progress.

35.g5+ Ke7 36.g6

Perhaps looking to win the Knight, but actually losing the Rook pawn. It was probably time to exchange Rooks, with an even game.

36...Rxh7 37.gxh7 Kf6 38.Ng4+ Kg7 39.Ne5 Nxe5 40.dxe5 Kxh7

Oh, those Jerome pawns! Are they actually going to save the day??

41.e6 Be8 42.Ke5 Kg7 43.f6+ Kf8 44.b4 Bh5 45.a3 Bf3 46.Kd6

46...Ke8

Finally cracking under the pressure.

47.f7+ Kf8 48.e7+ Kxf7 49.Kd7 Bg4+ 50.Kd8 d4 51.e8Q+ Black resigned

An Intriguing Letter (Part 1)

I recently received an email from chessfriend Филидор1792 ("Philidor 1792") that got me thinking about a whole lot of things in the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) universe – kind of like setting off a whole string of fireworks in my brain. This happened not too long ago (after another letter from Филидор1792) with the series of posts "Where Do Ideas Come From?" Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, so I knew that I was headed off on another adventure!

First, the letter

Hi,

There is some stuff, that may be interesting. When I was reading the article on Jerome Gambit in Wikipedia I noticed that the move 9.Na3 [1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.d4 Bxd4] that is mentioned there with reference to Chess Openings, Ancient and Modern (1896) by Freeborough and Ranken is not represented on your blog (probably I missed it). So I decided to check it with a friend of mine. White happened to win both games, though in second one it was lost.

Thanks for your time. I wish you Happy New Year

To start off: Wikipedia articles do not often link to blogs, but the Jerome Gambit article does – to this blog, of course.

Also, while Wikipedia does not have an article on Chess Openings, Ancient and Modern, itself, it does have an article on author Edward Freeborough (that is the link that I added to Филидор1792's letter). I was surprised to see that one of the references the Freeborough article gives is to a review of Chess Openings, Ancient and Modern – by yours truly. It's a small universe.

The People's Chess Opening

For every player that I encounter who plays the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) because he or she has seen it in a chess book (e.g. Freeborough and Ranken's Chess Openings, Ancient and Modern) or on a blog like this one, there are dozens who use Jerome-ish attacks while just play a game...

I regularly hear (or read) comments like

I had no idea that I was using the Jerome Gambit

That doesn't get in the way of playing the Royal Game and using "the duckbill platypus" of chess openings

I am not familiar with the names of gambits; I play chess for fun and relaxation; I no longer have time to really study

There can be personal comments like

I always try to sacrifice two peices when I'm playing. Stumbling upon this fun opening you call the Jerome Gambit is simply a result of that practice. The sacrificing of two peices has deep significant and personal meaning to me, and it reminds me of the many important life lessons that can be found in a game of chess.

What I almost always find is the opinion that I share with so many other players

I absolutely agree that the Jerome Gambit is a whole lot of fun to play, win or loose. As for my favorite game, well, that's always the next one.

Shillings: One Found, Two Lost (Part 1)

Sometime back I contacted Edward Winter, of "Chess Notes" and Chess History fame, with some questions about the origin and naming of the Blackburne Shilling Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4). He posted my query, and recently presented some relevant information. 

3786. Blackburne Shilling Gambit

From Rick Kennedy (Columbus, OH, USA):

‘The opening 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nd4 has been called the Blackburne Shilling Gambit, in recognition, apparently, of J.H. Blackburne’s use of it to win small stakes from players. However, I have yet to find a single game with it played by Blackburne. In fact, the earliest game uncovered was played in New Zealand in 1911. How did Blackburne’s name become attached to the variation? Indeed, when did it become attached?

Steinitz’s Modern Chess Instructor has a note on the line, but does not refer to Blackburne. Mr Blackburne’s Games at Chess makes no mention of it. Nor does Freeborough and Ranken’s Chess Openings Ancient and Modern attribute the line (given in a footnote) to anyone. E.E. Cunnington’s books (one on traps, one on openings for beginners), which were published in London shortly after the turn of the century, give the moves but do not name Blackburne.

One clue may be that the first edition of Hooper and Whyld’s Oxford Companion to Chess (1984) does not call the line by name, but the second edition (1992) calls it the Blackburne Shilling Gambit. Did the co-authors discover some historical information during that eight-year period?’

6470. Blackburne Shilling Gambit (C.N. 3786)

From page 429 of the December 1897 American Chess Magazine:

"All chess life seems to be with America," writes an esteemed and particularly well-posted English correspondent. "A great change has come over English chess. The 'old masters' are dying out. The new-born strength of amateurs has slaughtered them. They have no prestige. Names once of weight are now spoken of with contempt. No new professionals are coming in – no new Blackburnes or Birds. The 'nimble shilling,' for which the old professionals played at the Divan, is now too hardly earned. The country joskins know the openings and the principles, and instead of Bird's giving a Queen and winning twenty games in an hours, as I have seen ('hoc egomet oculis mei vidi'), he plays on even terms, and of five games wins only the odd one and a shilling. The ancient 'Shilling Gambit' is no longer a thing of dread. Young men from Birmingham walk into the Divan without awe and speak of giving odds. And the late H. Macaulay of this city (now Birmingham) actually conceded the Knight to a master who played and won a prize in the Manchester International, and Macaulay, giving the odds, won a majority of the games." - New Orleans Times-Democrat.

A Jerome Discovery (Afterword)

The chess columns from The Literary Digest (see Parts 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5) are an exciting discovery for Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) fans on several counts.

First, it gives analysis of an important defense for Black that is not very well known, but is very effective. See "Jerome Gambit Tournament: Chapter X" for both its first appearance (Sorensen - X, Denmark, 1888) and my use of it in Sir Osis of the Liver - perrypawnpusher, chessworld.net, 2008.

It also is the first "live" account of Alonzo Wheeler Jerome that I have run across, since the 1884 mention of him by the chess columnist of the Pittsburgh Chronicle-Telegraph (see "100 Posts - What more to say?").

That year must have been a difficult one for A.W. Jerome, as 1884 saw the publication of Cook's Synopsis of Chess Openings A Tabular Analysis by William Cook, With American Inventions in the Openings and Fresh Analysis since 1882, by J. W. Miller.

Cook's Synopsis of Chess Openings, 3rd Edition, (surely the English language MCO/ECO of its time) had been published in 1882 and sold out quickly. The newer edition from Miller contained analysis of the Jerome Gambit in both Cook's reprinted work and in the American "supplement" – without mention of Jerome, the man, and including the notation

We give the fullest analysis of this American invention that has yet been in print. The author is Mr. S. A. Charles, Cincinnati, O.

S. A. Charles, a member of the Cincinnati Chess Club (as was J. W. Miller), had written a series of analytical articles years earlier for the Cincinnati Commercial Gazette, Miller's newspaper, before going on to submit his work to the Pittsburgh Telegraph (later Chronicle-Telegraph).

In 1881, the Telegraph published Charles' "compilation" of what he could find of Jerome Gambit analysis, suplemented later by mostly incomplete correspondence games he had played with A. W. Jerome. This look at the Jerome Gambit was later that year picked up by Brentano's Chess Monthly, and the following year by Cook's Synopsis.

Although Charles mentioned Jerome when he wrote, by the time Cook got ahold of the analysis in 1882, Jerome's name, except for the Gambit's title, had been dropped. Then along came Miller in 1884, with the same "oversight".

This was all sealed with the 1889 publication of the first edition of Freeborough and Rankin's Chess Openings Ancient and Modern, which explained

Mr. S. A. Charles of Cincinnati, Ohio is named in the American Supplement as the chief analyst of this opening.

The Literary Digest's chess columns suggest that there might be other magazines out there with Jerome Gambit games and analysis by the gambit's inventor, from the mid-1880s to 1900.

The Jerome Gambit Gemeinde (early)

Followers of Emil J. Diemer and the Blackmar Diemer Gambit (1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6) composed a community they referred to as the Blackmar Diemer Gemeinde.

It only seems fitting to outline such a community for those associated with the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+).

Among the early members would of course be Alonzo Wheeler Jerome (1834-1902), credited with inventing the gambit, exploring it in over-the-board and correspondence play, and discussing it in the pages of the Dubuque Chess Journal and American Chess Journal.

Orestes A. Brownson, editor of the Dubuque Chess Journal, deserves membership in the Gemeinde, as he was enthusiastic about the Jerome Gambit, and from 1874 to 1876 published games played by Jerome and others.

William Hallock, editor of the American Chess Journal, was skeptical about the merits of the Jerome Gambit, referring to it at one point as "Jerome's Absurdity," but he carried on a discussion of the opening with Alonzo Jerome in the pages of the ACJ during the years 1876 and 1877. He can be considered part of the "loyal opposition" in the Jerome Gambit Gemeinde, (a role Gerhard Gunderam often took in the Blackmar Diemer Gemeinde).

Andres Clemente Vazquez, Mexican Chess Champion, played the Jerome Gambit three times in his 1876 match against William Carrington, scoring 3-0. The second (1885) and third (1889) editions of his Analisis del juego de ajedrez contain analysis of the gambit.

Henry Charlick, of Australia, who experimented with 1.d4 e5, played the Jerome Gambit in his 1881 match with J. Mann; and earlier experimented in his 1877 game against Holloway with what might be called the "Evans Jerome Gambit": 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4 Bxb4 5.c3 Bc5 6.Bxf7 (1-0, 76).

Lt. S. A. Sorensen, whose "Skaktheori for Segyndere" ("Chess Theory for Beginners") in the May 1877 Nordisk Skaktidende analyzed the Jerome Gambit, saw his work translated and published all around the world. His 1888 game against an anonymous player (the first example of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.d4 Qh4 that I have found) shows that he played the Jerome as well.

S. A. Charles, a member of the Cincinnati (Ohio, USA) Chess Club, wrote opening analyses, first for the Cincinnati Commercial Gazette, then later for the Pittsburgh Telegraph. It is in the latter paper that in 1881 he presented his examination of the Jerome Gambit. That year he also played an incomplete Jerome Gambit correspondence match with Alonzo Jerome.

J.W. Miller, also of the Cincinnati Chess Club, published in 1884 Cook's Synopsis of Chess Openings A Tabular Analysis by William Cook, With American Inventions in the Openings and Fresh Analysis since 1882. It included a reprint of Cook's Synopsis, 3rd edition (1882) which had been very popular and was already out of print. The Synopsis contained analysis of the Jerome Gambit which was based largely on Sorensen's article. The American supplement portion of the book contained Jerome Gambit analysis based largely on the work of S.A. Charles.

E. Freeborough and and C. E. Ranken included analysis of the Jerome Gambit in their Chess Openings Ancient and Modern (1st edition 1889, 2nd edition 1893, 3rd edition 1896, 4th edition 1910), a book that has been reprinted at least once in the modern era (Hippocrene Books, 1974) and which has been the introduction to the Jerome for a good number of players.

There are others who played or wrote about the Jerome Gambit in its early days, and I hope to welcome them into the Gemeinde in future posts.