Recently Bill Wall sent me 16 of his Jerome Gambit games that were Human + Computer vs Computer encounters. Such teamwork is sometimes referred to as advanced chess, or cyborg chess, or centaur chess.
Over the years, I have posted games from Human vs Computer matches (including the legendary 1993 Fisher-Kirshner - Knight Stalker battles, and the rolling 2006 RevvedUp - Fritz 8 - Crafty 19.19 - Hiarcs 8 - Shredder 8 - Yace Paderborn mayhem) as well as many Computer vs Computer games, but I think this is the first centaur chess I have presented.
The results are interesting - even if it is difficult to assign the relative impact that the human had on the play. Also, the time controls, which affect the strength of computer programs, are not known.
Over all, White scored 4 - 9 - 3 (34%), which would be unimpressive for a normal opening under normal circumstances, but which seems - as with all Jerome Gambit matches - a bit "high" for a many-times-refuted opening.
A little more insight is available by breaking the games down into 4-game matches.
Crafty vs Stockfish + Wall, for example, yielded 2 wins for Black when played by the team; and, likewise, 2 wins for White when played by the team. With all due respect to Dr. Robert Hyatt's computer engine, it appears it could have been simply outplayed by its stronger computer opponent. Who played what color did not seem to matter.
On the other hand, the Komodo 5 vs Rybka + Wall match, which ended with a score of 2 - 2 - 0, was composed of 4 wins by Black. Neither engine, it appears, was able to ovecome the "handicap" of playing the Jerome Gambit.
The Hiarcs 9 vs Critter + Wall match seemed a reflection of the comparative strengths of the computer programs, as Hiarcs 9 lost 2 games as White, and could only manage a draw as Black.
Interesting, also, was the Fritz 12 vs Houdini + Wall match. The team was 1 - 0 - 1 as White, and 1 - 0 - 1 as Black, suggesting that Houdini was the brighter computer program.
Looking at a couple of lines of play, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.d4 scored 2 - 5 - 1, while 6.Qh5+ scored 2 - 4 - 2, not much of a difference.
I will be sharing some of the games, taking a look at what "theoretical" enlightenment they bring.
When Jerome Gambit Gemeinde member Welton Vaz started the following game, I doubt that he realized the gigantic struggle that lay ahead of him. I'm pretty sure that his opponent figured that a win was only a matter of time – it was, but for White.
Ghandybh - mentalbreak
Chess.com, 2010
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6
The Semi-Italian Opening.
White's typical "Jerome treatment" is to play a temporizing move like 0-0 or Nc3 now, hoping for ...Bf8-c5, allowing the signature Bxf7+.
4.Bxf7+
Wow.
This reminds me of Veijoasquerosos of Mexico, who played over 1,100 games at RedHotPawn.com, and who played Bxf7+ (or ...Bxf2+) as early and as often as possible: see "King of Bxf7+".
I've played the move myself, although accidentally: perrypawnpusher - marapr, blitz FICS, 2007 (1-0, 27).
A look at the updated New Year's Database shows 904 games with this position, with White scoring 39%.
One of the top users of 4.Bxf7+ here is GFcrafty (a weakened version of Crafty, the free, open-source computer chess program developed by Dr. Robert M. Hyatt) at FICS.
Perhaps the most important of those games, however, is Gandybh - sqerl, Chess.com, 2009 which shows that Welton has played the line before, and is ready to face his opponent.
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+
Rybka, in its "blunder check" mode (5 minutes per move), suggested 6.d4 Nc6 7.Nc3 d6 8.0-0 Nf6 9.h3 Be7 10.d5 Nb8 11.Be3 Re8 12.Re1 as better. The line looks like no fun at all. Maybe when the "Jerome pawns" get rolling...
analysis diagram
6...Ng6 7.Qd5+ Ke8
White has his work cut out for him.
8.d3 Nf6 9.Qf5 Ne7 10.Qf4 Nc6 11.0-0 Nd4 12.Qe5+ Ne6 13.Be3 Qe7
14.Nc3 d6 15.Qb5+ c6 16.Qb4 c5
It looks like Welton's play has begun to annoy his opponent who would probably prefer "16.Resigns."
Good.
17.Qb5+ Bd7 18.Qxb7 Rc8 19.Qxa7
White now has 4 pawns for his 2 sacrificed pieces. That's not enough, but it's more than he had a few moves ago. Also, Black's King is stuck in the center, and at least for now his King's Rook is buried in the garage.
19...Ng4 20.Nd5 Qd8 21.h3 Nxe3 22.fxe3 Be7 23.Nxe7 Qxe7
Black has made progress in one area – when ahead in material, exchange pieces – but he still has an opponent fighting back.
24.Qb7 Rf8 25.Rxf8+ Qxf8 26.Rf1 Qe7 27.a3
Here's a clue: White believes that his "Jerome pawns" will one day be able to take on Black's two extra pieces in the endgame.
27...Rc7 28.Qb8+ Qd8 29.Qb6 Rc6 30.Qxd8+ Kxd8 31.Rf7
31...Ke8 32.Rf1 Rb6 33.b3 Ra6 34.a4 Ng5 35.h4 Nf7
Black has been teasing and provoking the pawns. No harm done. So far.
36.Kf2 Ne5 37.Ke2 d5
To open a path to swing the Rook over – but, a pawn is a pawn.
38.exd5 Rf6
39.d4
Hesitating. It was okay to exchange the Rooks.
39...cxd4 40.exd4 Bg4+ 41.Ke1 Rxf1+ 42.Kxf1 Nd7
Now the fun really begins.
White's plan is pretty clear: have his King escort the five connected past pawns forward, until one or more of them Queens.
Black has to counter this. Ideally, if he can hold up the pawns with his King and only one piece, then he can use (or sacrifice) the other to create a winning passed pawn on the other side of the board.
43.Ke1 Ke7 44.Kd2 Kd6 45.c4 Bf5
46.Kc3 Nf6 47.b4
47...Ne4+ 48.Kb3 Nd2+ 49.Kc3 Ne4+ 50.Kb3
White is willing to repeat the position and accept the draw.
50...Bd7
Black can't bring himself to "lose" the half-point.
51.a5 Nd2+ 52.Kc3 Ne4 53.Kb3 Nf2
Again Black wavers – and then decides "no draw". His problem is that now White's game gains momentum.
54.a6 Kc7 55.b5 Kb6
Rybka suggested instead : 55...Ne4 56.Kb4 Nd6 57.a7 Kb7 58.b6 Nc8 59.c5 Nxa7 60.bxa7 Kxa7 when it looks like Black's King and Bishop may be able to hold up White's central pawns (and draw) after all.
analysis diagram
56.c5+ Ka7 57.c6 Bc8
Black's Knight is sadly out of play.
58.d6 Ne4 59.d7 Nd6
60.d8Q Nxb5 61.Qxc8 Nd6 62.Qd7+ Nb7 63.Qxb7 checkmate
Very nice work. As they say, nobody ever won a game by resigning...
