Sailing Off the Edge of the World

I would guess that everyone who plays the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) has a particular defense that they would rather not face. That is funny, in a way, because the Jerome is a "refuted" opening, and therefore every defense should be uncomfortable...


Still, it was fun to see Philidor1792 in the following game take on the one defense that I worry about the most, played by a computer this time, at that, and wrestle it to the ground for a split point.


A computer can not make sense of the Jerome Gambit? Now, that's a surprise!


Philidor1792 - Computer (Crafty)
2012


1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 

7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 Qh4+ 


The storm clouds gather.


9.g3 Nf3+ 10.Kd1 Ne7 

11.e5+ 


A couple of alternatives from The Database:


11.Qxc5+ Kxc5 12.gxh4 d5 13.e5 Bg4 14.d4+ Nxd4+ 15.Kd2 Nf3+ 16.Ke3 d4+ 17.Kf2 Nxh4 18.Nd2 Raf8 19.Kg3 h5 20.Kxh4 Nf5+ 21.Kg5 Rh6 22.h3 Be2 23.Ne4+ Kd5 24.Nf2 Re8 25.Re1 Ree6 26.c4+ Bxc4 White forfeited on time, fehim - vshamis, FICS, 2008;

11.Qe5+ Nxe5 12.fxe5+ Kxe5 13.gxh4 Kxe4 14.d4 Kxd4 15.Nd2 Rf8 16.Nb3+ Kd5 17.c4+ Kxc4 18.Bg5 Bd6 19.Rc1+ Kd5 20.Re1 Nf5 21.Rc3 Bb4 22.Rd3+ Kc4 23.Re4+ Kxd3 24.Rxb4 Ne3+ 25.Bxe3 Rf1 checkmate, ionman - mscp, FICS, 2005. 


11...Kc6 


Instead, 11...Kd5 12.Qd3+ 1-0  was the imaginary "R.F."-"Nibs" telephone chess game of 1899. 


12.Qe4+ d5 13.exd6+ 


Or 13.Qxf3 Bg4 14.gxh4 Bxf3+ 15.Ke1 Bxh1 16.c3 Bg1 17.d4 Bxh2 18.Kf2 Rhf8 19.Na3 Be4 20.b4 Ng6 21.c4 Nxf4 22.cxd5+ Nxd5+ 23.Ke2 Nxb4 24.Ke3 Bd5 25.Bd2 Nxa2 26.Nc2 Rf4 27.Kd3 Rxh4 28.Rxa2 Rh3+ 29.Ke2 Bxa2 30.Nb4+ Kb6 31.Nxa2 Bg1 32.Nc3 Bxd4 33.Nd5+ Kc6 34.Ne7+ Kd7 35.Nf5 Bxe5 White resigned, Siggus - mscp, FICS, 2007.


13...Nd5 

The key. Otherwise: 13...Kxd6 14.gxh4 Bg4 15.Qa4 Ng1+ 16.Ke1 Bf3 17.d4 Bxh1 18.dxc5+ Ke6 19.Nc3 Rhd8 20.Be3 Nh3 21.Kf1 Nf5 22.Re1 Bc6 23.Qc4+ Kf6 24.Ne4+ Bxe4 25.Qxe4 Re8 26.Bd4+ Nxd4 27.Qxd4+ Kg6 28.Qd3+ Kf6 29.Qxh3 Rxe1+ 30.Kxe1 Re8+ 31.Kf2 Re4 32.Kf3 Rc4 33.c3 Rxc5 34.Qg4 Rb5 35.b4 Rf5 36.Qg1 c5 37.bxc5 a5 38.Qd4+ Kf7 39.Qd7+ Kf6 40.Qxb7 g6 41.c6 Rc5 42.c7 Rxc3+ 43.Ke2 Kf5 44.c8Q+ Rxc8 45.Qxc8+ Kxf4 46.Qe6 a4 47.a3 h5 48.h3 Kg3 49.Ke3 Kxh4 50.Qf6+ g5 51.Kf3 Kxh3 52.Qxg5 h4 53.Qg2 checkmate, ionman - mscp, FICS, 2005.


Hmmmm.... That's the second game where ionman faced this defense 7 years ago. I need to catch up with him... 


14.gxh4 Bg4 15.Qa4+ b5 16.Qa6+ Nb6 17.h3

Varying from 17.c4 Nd4+ 18.Ke1 Rhe8+ 19.Kf2 Nf5+ 20.Kf1 Bh3 checkmate,  abhailey - peonconorejas, net-chess.com, 2008, the first "real" game where I saw this particular defense. I was convinced four years ago that the Queen sacrifice was discovered with the help of a computer (The Database, with earlier games, was not available until January 1, 2010.) 


17...Bh5 18.c3 Nd4+ 19.Ke1 Nc2+ 20.Kf1 Rhe8 21.d4 Bxd6 22.d5+ Kd7 23.Qxb5+ Kd8 24.Rg1 g6 

In this chaotic position, Black is better.


25.Qc6 Nxa1 26.Na3 Re7 27.f5 Rd7 28.Nc4 Rb8 29.Bg5+ Kc8 30.Nxb6+ Rxb6 31.Qa8+ Rb8 32.Qxa7 Rf7 33.Qa6+ Rb7 34.Kg2 Rxf5 

35.Rxa1 Bf3+ 36.Kf1 Bxd5+ 37.Ke2 Be6 38.b3 Re5+ 39.Kd2 Bxh3 40.Re1 Rxe1 41.Kxe1 Kb8 

42.Qc6 Rb6 43.Qe8+ Kb7 44.Qf7 Bf5 45.Qxh7 Ra6 46.a4 Bg3+ 47.Kd2 Re6 48.Be3 Be1+ 49.Kxe1 Rxe3+ 50.Kf2 Rxc3 51.Qf7 Rc2+ 52.Kg3 Rc3+ 53.Kf4 Rh3 54.Kg5 Rg3+ 55.Kf6 Be4 56.Qc4 Rg4 

57.h5 gxh5 58.Qb5+ Ka7 59.Qxh5 Rg6+ 60.Ke5 Bc2 61.Kd4 Rd6+ 62.Kc3 Rc6+ 63.Kb2 Bd3 64.Qd5 Rd6 65.Qc5+ Kb8 66.b4 Kc8 

67.b5 Kd7 68.a5 Be4 69.a6 Rd1 70.a7 Rb1+ 71.Ka2 Rd1 72.Qf8 Bd5+ 73.Kb2 Rd2+ 74.Kc3 Ra2 75.Qc5 Bb7 76.b6 cxb6 77.Qxb6 Bd5 

78.Kd4 Bc6 79.Ke5 Re2+ 80.Kf6 Re6+ 81.Kg5 Re5+ 82.Kf4 Re4+ 83.Kf5 Re8 84.Qb8 Rc8 85.Ke5 Re8+ 86.Kd4 Ba8 87.Kc5 Rc8+ 88.Kb6 Rc6+ 89.Kb5 Rc8 Draw

Repairing a Variation (Part 3)

The next step in repairing a variation, after you have defined the problem (Part 1) and reviewed some game history (Part 2), is to see what has been written about the line.

Unfortunately, when you are dealing with a variation of the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+), reading up on the "His Nibs" Variation (4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Ke6 8.f4 Qh4) can be done during a coffee break.
There are only two sources in print that I have been able to find in about 8 years of study of the Jerome Gambit.

The first, in Randspringer #6 1990-1991, was in an article by Jack Young, author of many hysterical "Bozo's Chess Emporium" articles for Chess Horizons.

"Meet Jerome"

The Jerome Gambit (also known as the "Kentucky Opening" according to Blackburne), like the Reynolds Gambit, like the Chicago Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nxe5!! Nxe5 4.d4), like the Fred (1.e4 f5!!) desrves to be in the arsenal of every serious tournament player. Don't know the Jerome? That's OK but if you play through the following game I would not be surprised if it convinced you to venture the Jerome in your next serious tournament game. This important theoretical battle featured some real "high caliber" opposition and makes a good case for the playability of the Jerome Gambit...

...Young - Computer, 1991: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+! Kxf7 5.Nxe5+! Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4?! Another computer defused the attack after 8...Qh4+ 9.g3 Qf6

I admit that this is only a snippet of a mention, but I include it for a couple of reasons. First, it is also the first game (even if a partial) after "R.F" - "Nibs", 1899, that I have in my database. Secondly, it shows that the Black Queen check-and-return was primarily to disrupt White's kingside, not the beginning of a complicated Queen sacrifice.

The second reference I reviewed is from the unusual chess book Unorthodox Chess (2005), by the even more unusually-named author, Some Loser. (I reviewed the book for Chessville here.)

...the Jerome Gambit - an old favorite of mine, back in the good old days when I used to imagine I could get away with anything. It goes like so: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+!! Kxf7 5.Nxe5+! Nxe5 6.Qh5+ White will be able to recover one of the sacrificed pieces, after which Black's exposed King position plus the two Pawns, not to mention the fabulous shock value, almost compensate for the other piece. Ah, those were the days... and hard to swallow as it may seem, it has actually been known to work from time to time.
For instance 6...Ke6?! 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 Qh4+?! 9.g3 Nf3+ 10.Kf1 Nxh2+?! 11.Kg2 Qd8 [11...Qg4 12.Qd5+ Ke7 13.Qxc5+ d6 14.Qf2 Nf6 15.Rxh2 Nxe4 16.Qe3 Qe6] 12.Qd5+ Ke7 13.Qxc5+ d6 14.Qg5+ Ke8 15.Qxd8+ Kxd8 16.Rxh2 Nf6 17.d3 Ng4? 18.Rh4 Nf6 19.Be3 Bg4?! 20.Bd4 Bd1? 21.Na3 Be2 22.Kf2 Bxd3 23.cxd3 c5 24.Bxf6+ gxf6 25.Nc4 Ke7 26.Ne3 Kf7 27.Rah1 Kg6 28.Rh6+ Kg7 29.Nf5+ Kg8 30.Rxf6 d5 31.Nh6+ Kg7 32.Rf7+ Kg6 33.e5 Rhg8 [33...Rab8 34.f5+ Kg5 35.Rg7#; 33...Rag8 34.Rf6+ Kg7 35.Nf5#] 34.Rf6+ Kg7 35.Nf5+ Kh8 36.Rxh7+ Kxh7 37.Rh6#

The lesson from Some Loser's game (or analysis, it is not clear from the text) is that the White King move 10.Kf1 is not an improvement over abhailey's and R.F.'s 10.Kd1. This was confirmed in both perrypawnpusher - james042665, Chess.com, 2008 (0-1, 18) and perrypawnpusher - Temmo, chessworld.com, 2008 (0-1, 43), even though both defenders did not follow the best line of play.
Black's 10...Nxh2+ vs Some Loser was a mistake which surrendered the second player's advantage. As in abhailey - peonconorejas, net-chess, 2008, the best move was 10...Ne7 with similar powerful play against White's Queen and King. Also, 10...Qd8 gave White the advantage, whereas 10...Qg4 would have led to an equal game.

Repairing a Variation (Part 2)

It is helpful to look at some early play in the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) to develop a feel for the line that needs repairing (see "Repairing a Variation (Part 1)" ). The first example in my database of a game with 8...Qh4+ is an imaginary game presented in the June 1899 issue of the American Chess Magazine. In an article titled "A CHESS SCRAP" by "R.F." it is supposedly an early example of chess-by-telephone – filled with all of the difficulties that came from using a then new and unproven technology. "R.F." - "Nibs" telephone chess, 1899 "HULLO! Is this Nibs? I move 1.e4 --yes, I get you - 1...e5 now 2.Nf3 Black 2...Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 NOW 4.Bxf7+

"HULLO! Centr-r-r--what's up? YOU'RE not referee! -- pre-ee-kwu-ror-bing!!! "YES, I get you - Black 4...Kxf7 now 5.Nxe5+ --yes, I mean it --What opening? you'll see -- it's the END I'm after -- a variation on the Spanish -- fire away! 5...Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 all right -- "You want 1/3 OFF! Who are YOU?--Hullo--I'm not talking to Drex-irrwhixzyvilling--SAY, CENT, you've cut us off; what ails you?--Give me 725 38-- "Now, Nibs - 7.Qf5+ Kd6 I thought so -- this game adjourned till we check, Central. 8.f4 "NO, O-O -- WE'RE NOT THROUGH YET!! Hold the wire, what, your 8th? 8...Qh4+ ? Regular El Caney move -- "SPELL-ELL it - groorumbrkyxgz -- HBLLULLOOA YOU mind your biz! Send your manager to the wire - whyer-er-ert-r-roontoonmuling--Is this Central? Well, I've sent to a pay station to ring up your manager -- WHO HAS? I, I, myself, have, give me 725 38 -- You, Nibs? 9.g3 Nf3+ "Hang this-- match--You'll hang it up very soon now! 10.Kd1 Ne7 yes, not quite through- 11.e5+ Kd5 that can't draw you out, see? 12.Qd3+ check--your 8th move cooked your defence--goodbye, Central, you've mated him."

A few comments:

Fortunately, telephone service is far improved today, especially with the absence of an interrupting Central operator.

The American Chess Magazine article did not say if this "game" was based on a real game or someone's analysis.

The "El Caney" reference was to a July 1898 battle during the Spanish-American War, when 500 Spanish soldiers withstood the attack of 8,000 American soldiers for 12 hours. It is odd that the author attributes this to a Black move, as it is clear from diagram three that the second player in the game had more "troops" in the field.

The final comment – "you've mated him" – was incorrect. However, after 12...Nd4 White can play 13.gxh4, winning the enemy Queen, with a significant advantage.