My Turn Again

Publishing my wins with the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) on this blog only seems fair if I also include my losses. That means not just the ones where I get out-played, but the ones where I am doing just fine – and then blunder.

I've shared this lament before ("My Turn to Blunder") and surely will do so again. At least I can be sure that my opponents mostly understand.

After all, as we say in the Jerome Gambit Gemeinde, "Black wins by force; White wins by farce."

Here, the disaster comes against the Blackburne Shilling Gambit.
perrypawnpusher - vlas
blitz, FICS, 2009
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd44.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ 5...Ke7

Mentioned by Tim McGrew in 2004 in his "Gambit Cartel" article on the Blackburne Shilling Gambit, and by Dennis Monokroussos on his "Chess Mind" website in 2005. I have a dozen games in my database, and White has scored 8-4.

6.Qh5

Not the right follow-up. White should play 6.c3 d6 7.cxd4 dxe5 with about an even game.

6...g6

What Black misses is the defensive 6...Qe8, driving White's Queen back to d1. After that, White would have the Jerome-style two pawns compensation for his piece, but Black's counterplay after 7...Kd8 would be annoying.

7.Nxg6+ hxg6 8.Qxh8 Nxc2+

Black had better chances for equality by playing to trap the White Queen and then playing against it: 8...Nf6 9.Kd1 Kf7 10.Nc3 Qe7 11.Nd5 Nxd5 12.Qxd4 Nb6 13.d3 Bg7 14.Qe3 d5 15.exd5 Bg4+ 16.f3 Qxe3 17.Bxe3 Nxd5 18.fxg4 Nxe3+ 19.Kd2 Nxg4. White has a Rook and two pawns against two pieces.

9.Kd1 Nxa1 10.Qxg8 Qe8 11.b3 Kd8 12.Bb2 Be7

13.Qxe8+ Kxe8 14.Bxa1 d6 Things have settled down, and White is ahead two pawns. It's not a very complicated position.

15.d4 Bd7 16.Nd2 Rd8 17.h4 Kf7 18.h5

Looking for – or overlooking – trouble. Simpler was 18.d5

18...gxh5 19.Rxh5 Bg4+


Ouch.

Just drops a Rook.

The rest of the game was unnecessary.
20.f3 Bxh5 21.Ke2 c5 22.g3 cxd4 23.Bxd4 Bf6 24.Bxa7 Re8 25.Kd3 Bg6 26.f4 d5 White resigned

A Few Words With... Tim McGrew

Readers interested in the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) and other exciting opening sacrifices are likely familiar – or should become familiar – with Tim McGrew, past author of "The Gambit Cartel" columns for ChessCafe.

Tim has always been supportive of my work with the duck-billed platypus of chess openings, although he maintains an objective attitude:

The Jerome is, of course, completely unsound; it is a kind of miracle, and a tribute to Jerome’s tenacity, that it was analyzed seriously at all.

I was planning to do a short interview with Tim, when I discovered that Michael Goeller, host of The Kenilworthian blog, had already done so, and in great style.

Check it out. Michael said it was fine to make the link.

Pour yourself a cup of coffee first, though. You'll not only find the interview, you'll find links to all of Tim's "Gambit Cartel" columns plus a downloadable zipped file of them. And, as they say in the commercials: But wait! There's more!

I'll wait for you to come back...

Here's some of Tim McGrew's wisdom on adventurism in the opening

When you select an opening, you are not selecting the position that arises at move 20 after best play by both sides. You are selecting the whole opening with all of its traps and twists, its side lines and main lines.

And you are selecting it to play against flesh-and-blood opponents who will very frequently deviate from best play – probably early.

Which raises a very important question, supposing they do deviate from best play, what will happen then?

The answer depends on what I will call the “Caltrop Coefficient,” or CC for short. For readers not familiar with military history, I should explain that caltrops are mid-sized pieces of metal shaped rather like gigantic jacks with sharpened points. Canny soldiers camping just on the other side of a river from their enemies would sow the riverbed liberally with caltrops so that an enemy cavalry charge across the river would be demolished as the horses stepped on the caltrops and went down.

Mutatis mutandis, every wild-eyed gambiteer uses this strategy in chess as well. The more caltrops the better, particularly at blitz or bullet time controls! Let’s agree to say that an opening with a high proportion of moderately well-hidden traps has a high CC.

Of course, if our opponent has studied up on the opening, life will be very hard.

--The Gambit Cartel "Dimensional Analysis" 6/20/2004

graphic by Jeff Bucchino, "The Wizard of Draws"

Is This Blog About YOU??

Do you play the Jerome Gambit – 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ – or do you have it played against you?

Have you

analyzed

the opening

and its

offshoots?

Do you know of games that might be of interest to others

following this blog?

Have you done your own studies of this line?

Why not send them in:

richardfkennedy@hotmail.com and I will share them with fellow readers.