Having taken a look at what I called the "Face Palm Variation" of the Jerome Gambit, I wondered if there was an "improved" variation, where White played an early d2-d4, so that his Knight could safely move to g5 with the support of his dark square Bishop.
I quickly recalled the game Wright - Hunn, Arkansas,1874, played about a half year after Alonzo Wheeler Jerome published his first analysis of his gambit in the Dubuque Chess Journal. The game began 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d4 exd4 5.Bxf7+.
The line was referred to as The Macbeth Attack on the Italian language website Sacchi64. It has a relationship to the Italian Gambit, (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d4) as explored by Jude Acers and George S. Laven in their book The Italian Gambit and A Guiding Repertoire for White - 1.e4, (although they were not interested in Bxf7+) as well as to the Lewis Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.d4) and the Von der Lasa Gambit, (1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.Bc4 Bc5).
The Database has 1,413 game examples, with White scoring 37%.
Here is a recent game. Beware: the tactics get out of hand, quickly. White (who has almost 700 games in The Database) shows a number of practical choices to keep the clock at bay.
drumme - RikTheKing
4 0 blitz, FICS, 2020.
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
4...Kxf7 5.d4 exd4
A bit stronger, according to Komodo 10, is 5...Bxd4, although the result for White of the 645 games in The Database was only 26%.
6.Ng5+
By playing an early Bxf7+, White has avoided the Sarratt or Vitzthum Attack, although that's not necessarily a good thing.
6...Ke8 7.O-O h6
Facing a gambit can be scary, and it's natural to want to kick at the attacking piece - but this dismantles Black's defense, rather than helping it.
8.Qh5+ Ke7 9.Qf7+ Kd6
Black is now at risk for losing a lot of material.
10.Qd5+
White is not feeling very greedy, or perhaps in a 4-minute blitz game there wasn't the time (or need) to dig deeper: 10.Bf4+ Ne5 11.Bxe5+ Kxe5 12.Qxg7+ Nf6 (12...Qf6 13.f4+ Kd6 14.e5+) 13.f4+ Kd6 14.Nf7+ Kc6 15.Nxd8+ would have been painful for Black.
10...Ke7 11.Qxc5+
Grabbing the enemy Bishop, but it was stronger to play 11.Qf7+ Kd6 to return to the line given in the note above, 12.Bf4+ etc.
11...d6
Do I have to do this all over again?
Didn't I do it right the first time?
Do I have to do this all over again?
How many times do I have to make this climb?
from Long Title: Do I Have to Do This All Over Again?
12.Qc4 Ne5
Black could have grabbed the Knight, and hung on: 12...hxg5 13.Bxg5+ Nf6 14.f4 Qg8 15.Qxg8 Rxg8 16.e5 dxe5 17.fxe5 Nxe5 18.Re1 Ke6 19.Bf4 Nfg4
13.Qxd4 Nf6 14.f4 Nc6 15.Qc3 hxg5 16.fxg5 Nxe4
Well...
At first glance, Black seems to have played himself out of difficulty. Alas, it is actually a checkmate in 9, for White.
17.Qxg7+ Ke6 18.Qg6+
Now, interposing a piece will cost Black a piece. There wasn't time to suss out 18.Qf7+ Ke5 19.Nc3 Qg8 20.Bf4+ Kd4 21.Rfd1+ Kc5 22.Be3+ Kb4 23.a3+ Ka5 24.b4+ Ka6 25.Qf1+ Qc4 26.Qxc4+ b5 27.Qxc6 checkmate
18...Kd5
19.Nc3+
Again, development makes the most sense when time is short. Instead 19.c4+ Kc5 20. Be3+ Nd4 21.Qxe4 Kb6 22.Bxd4+ c5 23.Bxh8 was crushing.
19...Nxc3 20.Qd3+ Ke6
This might have seemed the safest choice, but it was not.
21.Qxc3
I am sure that after the game drumme found 21.Qf5+ Ke7 22.Qf7 checkmate
21...Ne5 22.Qb3+ Kd7
Black's uncomfortable King and extra piece is slightly outweighed by White's better development and 2 extra pawns. Although the players' fortunes now go up and down, White keeps the pressure on.
23.Bf4 Qe8 24.Rae1 Kd8 25.Qd5 Qc6 26.Qb3 Re8
Note, for the umpteenth time, Black's light-squared Bishop at home, blocking his Rook. Typical defense-to-the-Jerome-Gambit "sin".
27.g6 Nxg6 28.Bg5+ Ne7 29.Rxe7 Rxe7 30.Bxe7+ Kxe7 31.Qf7+ Kd8 32.Qf6+ Ke8 33.Re1+ Kd7 34.Qe7 checkmate
I have been enjoying watching the series of "Dirty Chess Tricks" videos on YouTube, by Gunjan Jani, especially "Dirty Chess Tricks 13" on the Lewis Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.d4.
This is an opening line that I have touched upon in this blog, starting with "SOS", writing about Secrets of Opening Surprises, Volume 10, which contained an article by Jeroen Bosch on the Lewis Gambit.
The earliest examples I have of the gambit are from an 1841 Staunton - Cochrane match, which makes it a possible inspration for Alonzo Wheeler Jerome in creating his Jerome Gambit, after the Lewis line 3...exd4 4.Bxf7+. The similarity to the Abrahams Jerome Gambit - 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Bxf7+ - is apparent. See "Proto-Jerome Gambits? (Part 4)".
There is also a similarity to a line in the Von der Lasa Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+, as seen in J.H. Blackburne - E.J. Evelyn, blindfold, London, 1862 (1-0, 32). And let's not overlook the "Macbeth Attack".
Jani rightly points out the possibilities of the Lewis Gambit transposing to the Max Lange Gambit, the Max Lange Attack, and the Italian Gambit.
(GM Boris Alterman has a video on the Lewis Gambit as well. Dangerous Weapons: 1.e4 e5 by GM John Emms, GM Glenn Flear, and IM Andrew Greet has good coverage of where the Lewis Gambit can go if Black does not allow a Bxf7+.)
When recently discussing the "Macbeth Attack" I mentioned the early game Wright - Hunn, Arkansas, 1874, which appeared in the November issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal for that year. The game began 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d4, garnering the comment "Brilliant but not sound" from the editor. (I suspect Jude Acers and George Laven, authors of The Italian Gambit and A Guiding Repertoire for White might challenge that "not sound" assessment.)
After 4...exd4 ("The German Handbuch gives as best variation 4...Bxd4 5.c3 Bb6 6.Ng5 Nh6 7.Qh5 O-O 8.f4 exf4 9.Bxf4 d6 10.Rf1 Qe7 and Black should win."), 5.Bxf7+ the editor commented "An unsound variation of Jerome's double opening." Still, he was able to join in the fun. After 5...Kxf7 6.Ng5+ he suggested that Ne5 "a la Jerome" is better than Ng5. That may not be "objectively" true, but capturing the imaginary pawn on e5 certainly is in line with the outlandish play of Alonzo Wheeler Jerome's creation.
I was surprised to find 40 games in The Database that, wittingly or unwittingly, followed the DCJ's suggestion. The following blitz game shows some of the fun behind the lighthearted suggestion.
SupremacyPawn - northug
blitz, FICS, 2014
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.d4 exd4 6.Ne5+
6...Nxe5 7.Qh5+ Ke6 8.f4 Nf6
Black is having so much fun "punishing" White for his audacity of early Queen moves - well, you know how those things sometimes go...
9.Qxe5+ Kf7 10.Qxc5
Black has quickly returned two pieces. He would do best to calm himself, rationally look at his new position, and plot a new strategy. Something like 10...d5 comes to mind, with either 11.Qxd4 Ne4 or 11.e5 Ne4 to follow, and despite his previous misfortunes, Black would not be worse.
Alas for the defender, he is sure that White has erred (a clear assessment that is out of date, however) and still can and should be punished for his transgressions.
10...Nxe4 11.Qd5+ Kg6 12.Qxe4+ Kf7 13.O-O
Black resigned
I recently discovered a page on the Italian language website Sacchi64 devoted to what it calls "the Macbeth Attack" (after Shakespeare's "Macbeth") 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ which the site also refers to as "the Crazy Attack". It includes a file of 56 computer-vs-computer games in a 2013 thematic tournament.
This line was seen (by transposition) as early as Wright - Hunn, Arkansas, 1874, referred to in the November 1874 issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal as "An unsound variation of Jerome's double opening."
Sacchi64 also has a page on the Jerome Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ as well as a file of 56 computer-vs-computer games in another thematic tournament (from 2009). I am playing through them, and am pleased to see that a few of the computers appear to have included the Jerome Gambit in their "books". As I noted in an earlier post
Given that the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) is not likely to be deemed "best" play for White by the analysis of any competent computer, any time the opening is played by a program, it is likely that the Jerome has been included in the opening "book".
I will share relevant games in future posts.
