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]

Happy New Year! (A Hysterical/Historical Jerome Gambit, Part 2)

                               [Continued from Christmas.] 

So far, the close look at my recent Jerome Gambit game has progressed a half-dozen moves. See "Merry Christmas! A Hysterical/Historical Jerome Gambit, Part 1".

Again, I have historical information from my never-published article submitted to Stefan Bucker for his magazine Kaissiber (and revised, and revised, and revised, and revised, and reassessed).

blitz, FICS, 2013
perrypawnpusher - spince

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Kf8 6.Nxc6 dxc6 

This position was reached in his first article with analysis of the Jerome Gambit (Dubuque Chess Journal 4/1874) by Alonzo Wheeler Jerome. 

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 American Chess Journal in 1876 and 1877, Hallock progressed from referring to “Jerome’s Double Opening” to “Jerome’s Gambit” to “Jerome’s Absurdity.”

                       

This light-hearted approach found full form in the May 1877 issue of the Danish chess magazine Nordisk Skaktidende, where Lieutenant Sorensen, analyzed the Jerome Gambit in his “Chess Theory for Beginners” column:

With this answering move of the Bishop [1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5] we have the fundamental position for that good old game which the Italians, hundreds of years ago, when they were masters of the Chessboard, called "Giuoco Piano," even game, but the later age, for generality of explanation, the "Italian game." On this basis the usual continuation is 4.c3, whereby the QP at the next move threatens to advance, and the White middle Pawns to occupy the centre. In the next articles we will make mention of that regular fight for the maintenance or destruction of the center, which is the essential point of the Italian game; in this, on the contrary, we will occupy ourselves with a Bashi-Bazouk attack, over which the learned Italians would have crossed themselves had they known it came under the idea of piano, but which is in reality of very recent date - 1874, and takes it origin from an American, A.W. Jerome. It consists in the sacrifice of a piece by 4.Bxf7+. Naturally we immediately remark that it is unsound, and that Black must obtain the advantage; but the attack is pretty sharp, and Black must take exact care, if he does not wish to go quickly to the dogs. A little analysis of it will, therefore, be highly instructive, not to say necessary, for less practiced players, and will be in its right place in our Theory, especially since it is not found in any handbook. The Americans call the game "Jerome's double opening," an allusion, probably, to the fresh sacrifice of a piece which follows at the next move, but we shall prefer to use the short and sufficiently clear designation, Jerome Gambit.

The August 1877 issue of the British Chess Player’s Chronicle and the December 1877 issue of the Italian Nuova Rivista Degli Scacci, reprinted Sorensen’s article (in English and Italian, respectively), introducing the Jerome Gambit to an even wider audience. Almost every Jerome Gambit analyst since has leaned heavily on Sorensen.

Interest in the Jerome Gambit did not remain just among beginning chess players. A couple of years later, Andres Clemente Vazquez included three wins with the Gambit, from his 1876 match against     Carrington, in his Algunas Partidas de Ajedrez Jugadas in Mexico por Andres Clemente Vazquez.

G. H. D. Gossip’s 1879 book, Theory of the Chess Openings, included an analysis of the Jerome Gambit, “substantially the same” as that which appeared in the Chess Player’s Chronicle, as the latter noted in a review of the work. At about the same time, the American daily newspaper, the Cincinnati Commercial Gazette, in its chess column, struck the right tone in its review of Theory, noting gleefully

...the Jerome Gambit, which high-toned players sometimes affect to despise because it is radically unsound, finds a place, and to this it is certainly entitled.

The next year, in 1880, when the 6^th edition of the illustrious Handbuch des Schachspiels was published, the Commercial Gazette’s chess columnist was again ready to “complain” about the state of affairs

…that the "Jerome Gambit" should be utterly (even if

deservedly) ignored.

The Cincinnati connection is an important one in the story of the development of the Jerome Gambit. In the 1870 and 1880s, the chess column of the Commercial Gazette, conducted by J. W. Miller, was considered to be one of the best in the United States. It occasionally ran opening analysis presented by S. A. Charles, a member of the local chess club. By January 1881, Charles had switched to sending his analyses to the Pittsburgh Telegraph (later, the Chronicle-Telegraph).

In October 1881, the Jerome Gambit broke onto the international scene again, in Brentano's Chess Monthly, (edited by H.C. Allen & J.N. Babson), with a letter and analysis from S. A. Charles.

The November 2, 1881 chess column in the Pittsburgh Telegraph ran Charles’ corrected and slightly updated version of his analysis from Brentano's Chess Monthly.

The year 1882 brought yet more attention, from respectable sources, to the Jerome Gambit. William Cook, with the assistance of E. Freeborough and C. E. Ranken, brought out the third edition of his Modern Chess Openings-style Cook's Synopsis of the Chess Openings A Tabulated Analysis. 


7.0-0

Like in the "annoying defense" against the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5+ 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 d6 8.fxe5 dxe5, etc.), Black has returned a piece to achieve a static position that limits White's attacking chances.

Here, though, White has the long-term plan of developing and deliberately advancing his "Jerome pawns". If Black is watchful during this process, he can probably return a second piece for two pawns and sue for peace.

Also played (often transposing) has been 7.d3, as in perrypawnpusher - Jore, blitz, FICS, 2011 (0-1, 16); perrypawnpusher - Conspicuous, blitz, FICS, 2011 (1-0, 13); perrypawnpusher - fortytwooz, blitz, FICS, 2010 (1-0, 29); perrypawnpusher - Lark, blitz, FICS,  2011 (1-0, 12); perrypawnpusher - pitrisko, blitz, FICS, 2011 (0-1, 30); and Wall,B - WMXW, FICS, 2012 (1-0, 31).

7.Nc3 (followed by 8.d3 and 9.0-0 ) was seen in perrypawnpusher - Ykcir, FICS, 14 0 blitz, 2009 (½-½, 11).

7.c3 was seen in Vazquez,A - Carrington,Wm, Mexico, 2nd match 1876 (1-0, 43).

7...Be6 

7...Nf6 was popular in the early games of this line, as in Jerome,A - Brownson,O, Iowa 1875 (½-½, 29); Norton,D - Hallock,A, correspondence, 1877 (0-1,18), Lowe,E - Parker,J, correspondence, 1879,  (0-1, 25);  and Lowe,E - Parker,J, correspondence, 1879 (1-0, 37).

Subsequent analysis has generally followed Jerome - Brownson, Iowa, 1875, with 7.O-O Nf6 8.Qf3 (Sorensen said 8.e5 would be met by 8…Bg4 9.Qe1 Kf7! which was how Norton – Hallock had continued ) Qd4 9.d3 Bg4 10.Qg3. At this point, Brownson played 10…Bb6. Jerome responded with 11.e5, and drew the game, with help from his opponent, in 29 moves. Brownson, in the Dubuque Chess Journal (3/1875), suggested 11.Kh1 and 12.f4 as an improvement for White.

Sorensen, Nordisk Skaktidende, (5/1877) gave the alternative line 10…Bd6, attacking White’s Queen, and followed this up with 11.Bf4 g5 12.Bxd6+ cd 13.h3 Be6 14.Qxg5 Rg8 15.Qh6+ Ke7 16.Nc3 Rg6 17.Qh4 Rag8 with a better game for Black. However, Charles later in the Pittsburg Telegraph (4/27/81) offered 11.c3 as an improvement, suggested to him by Jerome, which they believed reversed the valuation of the line.

As an historical aside, later sources, relying on - read: copying - Sorensen’s analysis, miss 11.c3; those that follow - read: copy - Charles’ work, based on his Brentano article or on the American Supplement, include it.

8.d3 

Better than my goofball 8.Qf3+ from perrypawnpusher - CorH, blitz, FICS, 2009 (0-1, 74). 

8...Qf6 9.Nc3 Ne7 10.Be3 Bd6

[To Be Continued on my birthday January 13, 2014.] 

[Comments and Emails are Welcomed and Encouraged.]

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.]

Battle Again

My introduction to MRBarupal was rather ubrupt: he beat my Jerome Gambit three straight times.

Since then we had met once more, and I had scored my first win.

Today's game is my second.

perrypawnpusher - MRBarupal
blitz, FICS, 2011

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

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Kf8

This is Sorensen's Variation, a solid defense and a change from the games MRBarupal and I had previously played, all of which had continued 5...Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 7.Qd5+ Ke8 8.Qxc5 d6 9.Qe3.

6.Nxc6 dxc6

I was surprised to see that Rybka 3 prefer 6...bxc6 by the tiniest bit, even though it allows 7.d4. Alonzo Wheeler Jerome is on record as preferring 6...dxc6.

7.d3

7.0-0 as in Jerome - Brownson, Iowa, USA, 1875 (1/2-1/2, 29) is probably more accurate, as it is clear that White will be castling Kingside, but it is not totally clear (depending on Black's development) that the first player has to completely forego d2-d4.

That said, after 7.0-0 Nf6 White may respond with 8.d3 (better than 8.e5 of Norton - Hallock, corr 1877), which would simply be a transposition to this game.

7...Nf6

I have had mixed success against 7...Qf6: perrypawnpusher - fortytwooz, blitz, FICS, 2010 (1-0, 29); perrypawnpusher - Lark, FICS, 2011, (1-0, 12); and perrypawnpusher - Jore, FICS, 2011, (0-1, 16).

8.0-0 Bg4

A slower game came about after 8...h6 9.Be3 Qe7 10.d4 Bb6 11.f3 Kg8 12.Nc3 Kh7 13.Qd3 g6 in perrypawnpusher - vladchess, blitz, FICS, 2011, (½-½, 46).

9.Qe1

Black's Bishops are really annoying! It was beginning to feel like my "nemesis" was taking over the game again.

9...Qe8

Instead, 9...Qe7 was seen in Lowe - Parker, corr, 1879 (1-0, 37)

10.Be3 Bd6

10...Qe7 and 10...Bb6 are slightly better alternatives, mostly because they prove to be less complicated than the text.

11.f4 Nh5

Instead, after the game Rybka 3 suggested that it was time to return the piece for three pawns: 11...Nxe4 12.dxe4 Qxe4 13.Nc3 Qxc2

analysis diagram









Here Black is a pawn up, but the uncertain placement of his King and the open lines against it give White sufficient counterplay to call the game even.

The text allows White's "Jerome pawns" to advance with malice.

12.e5 Be7 13.f5

Black resigned

I admit that I was a bit surprised at my opponent's decision, as in the past he had shown some strong tactical chops in messy situations.

It is true that after 13...Qf7 14.Nd2 Bxf5 15.g4 g6 16.gxf5 gxf5 material is even and Black's f-pawn is hanging, but after 17.Qf2 Rg8+ 18.Kh1 Qd5+ 19.Ne4 Ng7 it still has not fallen and after 20.Qg3 Ke8 21.c4 Qf7 22.Bh6 Ne6 23.Rxf5 Rxg3 24.Rxf7 Kxf7 25.hxg3 Rd8 it doesn't look like the extra pawn for White will account for much, at least according to Rybka 3 and Fritz 8.

Perhaps events off of the chess board accounted for his need to leave.

Like a Needle in a Haystack (Part 3)

The March 1874 issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal contains a game between "Mr. S" (William A. Shinkman?) and Alonzo Wheeler Jerome – a King's Gambit won by Jerome. This was followed by further contributions by Jerome, in April and July of the same year; and in January, March, June, October and November of the following year.

Consistent with yesterday's post (see "Like a Needle in a Haystack Part 2"), after information from Jerome appeared in the March 1876 issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal, new items began to appear in Hallock's American Chess Journal, in June, September, October, November and December of 1876. Alonzo Wheeler Jerome had begun corresponding with the "new" chess journal.

Jerome contributed to the February, March and April 1877 issues of the American Chess Journal, and then seems to have lost contact or interest. Hallock's ACJ ended publication December 1877.

Brownson's Chess Journal had one Jerome item that year, in March of 1877

For the Jerome Opening play a few games by correspondence with A. W. Jerome (the inventor), P.O. address, Paxton, Ford Co., Illinois, and try it over the board when the opportunity offers. It is brilliant.

(Ten years later, the May 1887 issue of Brownson's Chess Journal published an unusual Giuoco Piano with Jerome playing Black.)

What publication did A.W. Jerome correspond with after the American Chess Journal ? The trail grows cold...

Until Jerome appears, mostly in support of S.A. Charles, in the Cincinnati Commercial Gazette and Pittsburgh Telegraph of the early 1880s (a tale for another time); and then over 20 years later, in the pages of the 1900 Literary Digest, offering to play his Gambit against readers in consultation.

Yet, just the other day I was wandering through the Chess Archaeology site (http://www.chessarch.com/) and encountered the "Jack O'Keefe Project Index" which has viewable chess columns from 33 older periodicals. By chance I happened upon some "cuttings" there from "Mackenzie's Chess Chronicle" published in Turf, Field and Farm. The August 30, 1878 column has the following

We are indebted to Mr. A. W. Jerome for some correspondence games illustrative of the new Jerome Gambit, which shall receive early attention.

Aha! The game is afoot!

Sadly, the Chess Archaeology site's collection of "Mackenzie's Chess Chronicle" runs only to December 27, of 1878, and there is no further mention of the Jerome Gambit in that span... Although that last held issue provides some foreshadowing, announcing as it does

We welcome with pleasure a new chess column in the Cincinnati Commercial. It made its first appearance in the issue of Dec. 14, and is to appear every Saturday in the daily; the column is conducted by Mr. J. W. Miller, and, judging from the two specimens we have seen, it promises to be a valuable addition to the chess periodicals.

Like a Needle in a Haystack (Part 2)

Of course, primary historical sources of Jerome Gambit games and analysis are the chess magazine and magazine and newpaper chess columns of the period. Finding a Jerome "needle" in that many "haystacks" without some kind of a clue can be an exhausting task.

An excellent example of such a "clue" is the Jerome Gambit entry from the Oxford Companion to Chess (1984) by David Hooper and Kenneth Whylde

Jerome Gambit in the Italian Opening; an unsound gambit that can lead to much amusement in light hearted play. It first appeared in the American Chess Journal, 1876, recommended by the American player Alonzo Wheeler Jerome (1834-1902) of Paxton, Illinois.

While games and references to Alonzo Wheeler Jerome and his gambit can be found in the June, September, November and December 1876 issues of the American Chess Journal, it turns out that analysis appeared two years earlier, in the April 1874 issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal.

Confusing these two journals, by the way, is not difficult. As Tim Harding wrote in his "The Kibitzer" column at ChessCafe.com in 2007

...[T]he Dubuque Chess Journal was started by Professor Brownson in 1870 and he stopped it after number 73 in summer 1876.

He thought he had sold the rights to W. S. Hallock, who produced the first two volumes of The American Chess Journal, beginning with June 1876 and numbered consecutively from Brownson, i.e. he started with number 74... It was published in Hannibal, Missouri, from June 1876 to December 1877...

Hallock apparently did not pay Brownson (or at least that is what Brownson said) so Brownson restarted his magazine as Brownson’s Chess Journal in February 1877, also resuming with number 74. At different times, Brownson varied his titles...

Having re-established his rights, Brownson stopped in 1878, but resumed again many years later... The last three Hallock issues (his incomplete volume 2) were bi-monthly, with the November-December issue very short. Here he announced he had sold his rights to Dr. C. C. Moore in New York...

Because of moving everything to another city, there was a delay and the new series of The American Chess Journal began March 1878... It ended July 1879.

Moore then sold to Barbe, in Chicago, who did his best to continue The American Chess Journal as a quarterly...

Barbe published Vol. 1-Vol. 2, no 3 (Oct 1879-Dec 1881), but actually number 3 was April 1881. To increase the confusion, the issue of October 1880 was headed volume 1 no 5 on the title page, but as this was a quarterly, it should have been vol. 2 no. 1, as Barbe must have realised subsequently. So then comes January 1881, headed Vol. 2 no 2, but the page numbers are continuous from October 1880. Then April 1881 was the last issue...

After the end of Barbe’s series, there were no Journals until Brownson resumed in 1886.

Got it, right?