A) Good B) Bad C) Ugly D) None of the Above

IM John Watson and NM Eric Schiller's new Taming Wild Chess Openings Good, Bad, and Ugly (New In Chess, 2015) is a revised and expanded print version of their 2014 same-titled EPlus ebook; which, in turn was an updated version of their Big Book of Busts (Hypermodern Press,1995).

Alas, call the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bx5 4.Bxf7+) "good", "bad" or "ugly" - it does not appear "wild" enough or in need of "taming" as it does not appear in Taming Wild Chess Openings.

One can certainly make the case that the Jerome Gambit is "annoying," however, so it is not suprising to find it in the authors' earlier Survive and Beat Annoying Chess Openings The Open Games (Cardoza, 2003),

As the Jerome can be thought of as both "unorthodox" and a gambit, it is understandably found in Schiller's Unorthodox Chess Openings (Cardoza, 1998, 2002) and his Gambit Chess Openings (Cardoza, 2002).

Joker's Wild (conclusion)

We conclude an article (see "Joker's Wild (1)" and "Joker's Wild (2)") by Louis Morin ("mrjoker") of Montreal, Canada, a long-time Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) Gemeinde member. He completes his response to the "Bashing the Jerome Gambit" chapter in Schiller and Watson's Survive & Beat Annoying Chess Openings (2003), and your editor has a few words to add.

17.b5! Kb6

17...Kxb5?? 18.Qd3+ is completely hopeless for Black. Try it!

18.Qd3! c6

19.Nc4+ Kc7 20.Nxd6

with much the better game for White. So after their suggested 6...Ke6 7.f4 Qf6! Schiller and Watson should have seen the obvious 8.Rf1 and analyzed reasonable moves such as 8...g6 or 8...Nd3+ (best in my opinion). But as it is their "piece of analysis" does not teach us very much. One can only wonder if the rest of the book has the same pedagogical value.

Louis Morin (mrjoker)
Montreal, Canada

It is likely that the analysis in "Bashing the Jerome Gambit" is Eric Schiller's work, as it is largely a repeat of his analysis given in Unorthodox Chess Openings (1998, 2002) and Gambit Chess Openings (2002). Other analysis in Survive & Beat Annoying Chess Openings is more reliable – I am thinking of the coverage of the Danish Gambit, for example.

Here's a game that shares the first 8 moves with the above analysis, although Black varies with 8...g6: mrjoker - jmt (1516), blitz, ICC, 2008,1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 Qf6 8.Rf1 g6 9.Qh3+ Ng4 10.Qxg4+ Ke7 11.Qe2 Qd4 12.c3 Qg7 13.d4 Bb6 14.g4 d6 15.f5 g5 16.e5 dxe5 17.dxe5 Kd8 18.f6 Qf7 19.Bxg5 h6 20.Bh4 Be6 21.Nd2 Kc8 22.b3 a6 23.Ne4 Kb8 24.0-0-0 Ka7 25.c4 Ba5 26.Kb2 Rb8 27.Bf2+ Ka8 28.Nc5 Bb6 29.Qe4 Black resigned

Joker's Wild (2)

We continue with an article (see "Joker's Wild (1)") by Louis Morin ("mrjoker") of Montreal, Canada – a long-time Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) Gemeinde member – as he gives his response to the "Bashing the Jerome Gambit" chapter in Schiller and Watson's Survive & Beat Annoying Chess Openings (2003).

11.d4!

At the cost of a pawn White opens the game and puts the centralized King in real danger.

11...Qxd4 12.c3!

Attacks the Queen with tempo.

12...Qc4

I cannot give each and every variation, but 12...Qd3 is strongly met by13.Rf3 Qc2 14.Nd2. With his Queen out of play and his King dangerously standing in the center, Black will soon have to give back at least his Bishop, for example 14...Kc6 15.b4! Bd6? (he should leave his Bishop where it stands) 16.e5! Bxe5? (same comment) 17.Qc4+ Kd6 18.Ne4+ 1-0

analysis
diagram





13.Nd2!

Still attacking the Queen with tempo!

13...Qe6 14.Qg3+

Now attacking the King with tempo.

14...Kc6

Of course not 14...Qe5 15.Nc4+

15.b4!

And now attacking the Bishop with tempo. Black is so busy defending against so many threats that he cannot save this Bishop anymore.

15...Bd6?

Black should let his Bishop go, for example 15...Bb6 16.a4 a5?? 17.b5+ followed by mate.

[to be continued]

Joker's Wild (1)

This article is by Louis Morin ("mrjoker") of Montreal, Canada. mrjoker is a long-time Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) Gemeinde member, and his games have appeared on this blog numerous times before.

I hope readers enjoy this contribution, especially those who question whether "serious analysis" and "Jerome Gambit' can fairly occupy the same sentence.

I just bought the book Survive & Beat Annoying Chess Openings by Schiller and Watson, because I was eager to read the section entitled "Bashing the Jerome Gambit". Should I say that I am very disappointed? Even though though the authors are strong masters, their piece of analysis is very lousy at best.

Basically, after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+

the authors suggest that Black can get a promising position after 6...Ke6 7.f4 Qf6! 8.Nc3 Ne7 9.Rf1 g6 10.Qh3+ Ng4! because the f-file remains closed and White's attack fades away.

I will NOT discuss this position for a very simple reason: it it completely irrelevant!Schiller and Watson simply missed that their suggested 8.Nc3 for White is a losing blunder! Black gets a winning position after the obvious 8...Qxf4 9.d4 Nf6!
(they probably only looked at 9...Qf6 10.d5+ Kd6 11.Nb5+ Ke7 12.Bg5), for example 10.Bxf4 Nxh5 11.Bxe5 Bb6 followed by 12...d6.
White is simply a piece down for a Pawn, with no compensation whatsoever.
Instead of 8.Nc3? losing the f4-pawn and the game, White should play the obvious 8.Rf1, and unfortunately Schiller and Watson do not say how Black should continue. But wait a minute. Suppose Black plays 8...Ne7, then White will answer 9.Nc3 and Black is back in the variation he wants by 9...g6 10.Qh3+ Ng4! etc. Right?

Wrong! After

8.Rf1 Ne7?

White gets a promising game with the simple

9.fxe5 Qxe5 10.Qg4+
and now we see the flaw in 8...Ne7?. Black would like to go back to e7, but unfortunately a Knight is occupying this vital square. So the King has to stay in the center with 10...Kd6. How should White react?

[to be continued]

Another nail in the coffin...

Readers are aware that I have not shied away from presenting refutations of the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) when I run into them (or am run over by them). It's time to give Master Eric Schiller credit (again) for both writing about the Jerome Gambit and providing a reasonable refutation for one of the main lines.

His Unorthodox Chess Openings (1998, 2002), Gambit Chess Openings (2002) and Survive & Beat Annoying Chess Openings (2003) have the following line:

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7

This rather extravagant gambit is included by popular request, as the Internet newsgroup rec.games.chess.analysis had quite a bit of discussion on it in the summer of 1997 and several of the participants asked me to include it. White sacrifices a piece just to draw the enemy king into the game... (Unorthodox Chess Openings)

5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+

This too ambitious gambit has a following in some gambit circles, but it is totally unsound and Black has very little cause for concern. Just play aggressively and don't fall into passive cowardice. (Survive & Beat Annoying Chess Openings)

6...Ke6 7.f4

White will win back one of the sacrificed pieces. Black should react calmly be developing and protecting the king. It is useful to keep in mind that for an attack to succeed the attacker usually requires greater force than that which defends the king. Here the Black king is surrounded by pieces, and White has only the queen and a pair of pawns. The Black king can retreat to e7, but this would confine the Black queen. Therefore the correct move suggests itself. (Unorthodox Chess Openings 2)

7...Qf6! 8.Nc3 Ne7 9.Rf1 g6 10.Qh3+ Ng4 11.Qxg4+ Kf7

Black can easily defend with ...Rf8 and ...Kg8, and can also move the d-pawn, attacking the enemy queen. (Gambit Chess Openings)