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.
Chessfriend Vlasta Fejfar of the Czech Republic has faced the "annoying defense" to the Jerome Gambit a number of times. In the following game, his most recent, he comes away with the whole point. Vlastous - Idalgit Internet, 2017 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 d6
This is also called the "silicon defense" because it is the choice of many computer chess programs. Black returns a piece and takes a lot of the action out of the position. 8.fxe5 dxe5 9.Qh3+ Kf7 The text is about equal to 9...Ke7 which was seen in Fejfar,V -Goc,P, 2015(1/2 - 1/2, 70), Fejfar,V - Chvojka, correspondence, 2016(0-1, 32) and Vlastous - irinat, Chessmaniac, 2016 (0-1, 38). 10.Qh5+ Ke6 11.Qe2
A tactical slip that drops a piece. Black may have unconsciously decided that his opponent has finished moving his Queen. 14.Qc4+ Ke7 15.Nxc5 b6 16.Nd3 a5 17.Qc3 Ke6
18.Qb3+ Black resigned Perhaps a bit soon, but Black sees he will lose the b-pawn, and White's Queen will escape any danger, so the game may have lost its interest.
I have been sharing games (starting with "Irrational") where Bill Wall has given various chess-playing computer programs "Jerome Gambit odds" - and won. There were some losses, however. Curiously, while I have been wordy and full of "insight" in presenting Bill's wins, I am at a loss for many words concerning the following game. As the "Talking Fritz" program might have said, "Q.E.D." Wall, Bill - Alfil engine Palm Bay, FL, 2015 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
Immediately after blundering on move 11, I thought about resigning; but I decided to hold on for a move... then another... then another. Eventually, I held on for the win. Blitz games can be very strange, and those featuring the Jerome Gambit even more so. Some of the positions in the following game might make up for the questionable play of both me and my opponent. perrypawnpusher -Toscolano blitz, FICS, 2015 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
Surprisingly a TN according to The Database. Of note, however, is that after 8...d6 9.Qe3 a successful computer choice was 9...Qh4 in RevvedUp - Yace Paderborn, 2 12 blitz, 2006. In the same competition, 7...Kf8 8.Qxc5+ d6 9.Qe3 Qh4 was seen inRevvedUp - Shredder 8, 2 12 blitz, 2006 and Shredder 8 - RevvedUp, 2 12 blitz, 2006. 9.Nc3 d6 An indication of how weird things were going to get is that after the game Houdini recommended, instead, 9...Qg4 10.Rg1 Kd8. 10.Qe3 I probably could have taken the pawn with 10.Qxc7, but it looked complicated. After the game, Houdini agreed with me: 10...Qg4 11.Nb5 Qxe4+ 12.Kf1 Qe7 13.b3 Bf5 14.Ba3 Qxc7 15.Nxc7+ Kd7 16.Nxa8 Nf6 17.Nc7 Kxc7 18.d3 and things would be about balanced between White's extra Rook plus 2 pawns vs Black's two extra Knights.
analysis diagram 10...Nf4 11.g3 A mindless move, after which I immediately thought of resigning. Of course, White needed to be brave and castle. 11...Ng2+ 12.Ke2 Bg4+ Strong, but even stronger would be 12...Qh5+. 13.f3 Qh3
Black is still better after playing the text, but it was time for 13...Nxe3 14.gxh4 Nxc2 15.Rb1 Bh5, when Black would be up a piece for a pawn. 14.Qf2 Bh5 Black appears repelled by the tactical mess too, and continues to play "safe" and "normal" moves instead of doing concrete analysis - understandable in blitz. After the game Houdini suggested that Black wade in and keep his advantage with 14...Ne7 15.d3 Rf8 16.Bf4 Nxf4+ 17.gxf4 Rxf4 18.Qg3 Rxf3 19.Qxh3 Rxh3+ 20.Kf2 Kd7.
analysis diagram 15.d3 This is now good enough for equality, while 15.Rg1 would lead to a White advantage. 15...Nf6 This hands over the advantage - not that I was ready to take it! Black could maintain equality with 15...Ne7 16.g4 Bxg4 17.fxg4 Qxg4+ 18.Qf3 Qxf3+ 19.Kxf3 Nh4+. 16.Bg5 I was still floundering. Instead of this reasonable move White should have played 16. Rg1 with an small edge (2 pieces vs Rook) after 16...Rf8 17. Qxg2 Qxg2+ 18. Rxg2 Nxe4 19. dxe4 Bxf3+ 20. Kf1 Bxg2+ 21. Kxg2 Kd7.
analysis diagram 16...h6 Finally letting White off the hook. Instead, Black should have piled on with 16... Ng4, which wins, for example 17.fxg4 Qxg4+ 18.Kf1 (18.Kd2 Qxg5+ 19.Qf4 Nxf4; 18.Qf3 Qxf3+) 18...Rf8 19.Qxf8+ Kxf8 20.Kxg2 Qxg5. 17.Bxf6 gxf6 18.Rag1 f5 19.Qxg2 Qxg2+ 20.Rxg2 fxe4 21.dxe4 Rf822.Rf2 c6
The smoke has cleared, and White ("It is better to be lucky than good") is up a couple of pawns. 23.Rd1 Kd7 24.Rd3 Rae8 25.Kd2 An ending slip. 25...d5 26.exd5 cxd5 27.Rxd5+ Kc6 28.Rxh5 Rd8+ 29.Kc1 Rfe8 30. Rxh6+ Kc7 31.Re2 Rf8 32.Re7+ Kc8 33.Rhh7 Rxf3 34.Rc7+ Kb8 35.Rxb7+ Kc8 36.Rhc7 checkmate
Okay, say it with me, "Nobody ever won a game by resigning." Lesson learned.
We continue (see the earlier "Opening Report" parts 1, 2, and 3) to uses ChessBase's Opening Report function to take a look at the games in The Database. As a reminder, the Report gathers what lines are being played, and what lines are being used by the top players in the database. It gives a good "real life" view of the play of the Jerome Gambit, even if it does not always identify the objectively best move or line. Opening Report 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+
It's time again (see the earlier "Opening Report" parts 1, 2, and 3) to use ChessBase's Opening Report function to take a look at the games in The Database. The Report gathers what lines are being played, and what lines are being used by the top players in the database. It gives a good "real life" view of the play of the Jerome Gambit, even if it does not always identify the objectively best move or line. (That would require a process called backsolving, which is not available in my ChessBase8.)
The Opening Report again also highlights a number of games from an interesting 2008 30-game human vs computers match (starting with "Jerome Gambit: Drilling Down (1)" This post starts an extended series (which may be interrupted from time-to-time for news, games or analysis) wherein the intrepid "RevvedUp" (a good chess player) and his trusted companions Hiarcs 8, Shredder 8, Yace Paderborn, Crafty 19.19 and Fritz 8 explore the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) by taking turns playing the White and Black pieces.
The human moves first, and takes notice of the defense the computer plays. In the next game, where he moves second, the human plays that defense against a new computer – and sees how it attacks. In the third game, the human plays the recent attack against his new computer foe. Collectively, the players drill deeper and deeper into the Jerome Gambit.
So far, the recent Opening Report on the Jerome Gambit (see 1, 2 and 3), based on the 27,000+ games contained in TheDatabase, has had few surprises. I'd like to point out a couple of interesting findings, however, before pursuing a deeper look. The Opening Report highlights a number of games from an interesting 2008 30-game human vs computers match (starting with "Jerome Gambit: Drilling Down (1)" This post starts an extended series (which may be interrupted from time-to-time for news, games or analysis) wherein the intrepid "RevvedUp" (a good chess player) and his trusted companions Hiarcs 8, Shredder 8, Yace Paderborn, Crafty 19.19 and Fritz 8 explore the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) by taking turns playing the White and Black pieces.
The human moves first, and takes notice of the defense the computer plays. In the next game, where he moves second, the human plays that defense against a new computer – and sees how it attacks. In the third game, the human plays the recent attack against his new computer foe. Collectively, the players drill deeper and deeper into the Jerome Gambit. It also shows that Jerome Gambit players sometimes prefer chaos to clarity, as recommended responses to the Jerome Gambit Declined (again, based on the examples in TheDatabase) - 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kf8 or 4...Ke7- are given as 5.Nc3and 5.Nxe5, respectively. The straight-forward Bishop retreat 5.Bb3 (as well as its cousin, 5.Bd5) is stronger. We will use the ChessBase Opening Report to dig deeper into the Jerome Gambit (through the eyes of TheDatabase), but first there are a few new interesting games from Philidor1792 to look at.
I decided to have ChessBase8 give me an Opening Report on the Jerome Gambit, based on The Database. I got a whole lot of information, and I was only dealing with the first few moves...
Opening report 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 9062 games in 'TheDatabase'
If I told you that an online player recently challenged a computer (rated about 350 points higher than himself) to a game of chess, choosing to play an often-refuted opening and facing its best-known defense (highlighted in a brutal miniature by a master known as "the Black Death") – well, you might be inclined to say "Poor, poor human." Oh, but you noticed: this post is titled "Poor, Poor Computer" (my emphasis). Welcome to the weird and wonderful world of the Jerome Gambit! radicalmove - LuigiBot rated standard game, FICS, 2012 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 d6
Blackburne's Defense, made famous by the game Amateur - Blackburne, London, 1885. See "Flaws (Part I) and Flaws (Part II)". 8.Qxh8 Qh4 9.0-0 Nf6 10.Qd8
White's 10th move was suggested shortly after the Blackburne game was played, but it did not become widely known. Most players understand the end of Black's counter-attack to be a combination of "Nobody Expects the Jerome Gambit!" and "Mars Attacks!" 10...Qxe4 This is a move that computers are fond of. See "Ionman vs the Bots" for some examples. 11.Qxc7+ Instead, 11.Nc3 was seen in the game RevvedUp - Shredder 8, blitz 2 12, 2006 (0-1, 25) from the incredible match, RevvedUp vs Hiarcs 8, Shredder 8, Yace Paderborn, Crafty 19.19 and Fritz 8. See "Jerome Gambit: Drilling Down (1)" for starters. 11...Bd712.d3 Qd5 13.Nc3 Qc6 14.Qxc6 Bxc6
LuigiBot has traded off its harassed Queen, but the situation looks kind of grim in any event. White is ahead the exchange and a couple of pawns; about a piece worth of material. Quite a change from less than a dozen moves ago! 15.Be3 Re8 16.Rae1 Re6 17.Bxc5 dxc5 18.Rxe6 Kxe6
Radicalmove is content to continue to reduce the play to a basic endgame. 19.a3 Kf5 20.h3 h6 21.b4 cxb4 22.axb4 Kf4 23.b5
As if the current game were not bad enough, the two combatants played another game the same day (I do not know which was played first, but it might be the longer one) with the same result: 23.Re1 Bd7 24.h4 Bc6 25.g3+ Kf5 26.d4 Ne4 27.Nxe4 Bxe4 28.c4 b6 29.c5 h5 30.cxb6 axb6 31.Ra1 Bd5 32.Ra6 b5 33.Ra5 Ke4 34.Rxb5 Kxd4 35.Rb8 Kd3 36.b5 Kd4 37.b6 Kc5 38.b7 Kd4 39.Rd8 Ke4 40.b8Q Kd4 41.Qb7 Ke5 42.Qxd5+ Kf6 43.Rd7 Black resigned, radicalmove - LuigiBot, rated standard game, FICS, 2012. 23...Bd7 24.Re1 Bf5 25.h4 Bg4 26.g3+ Kf5 27.d4 Nd7 28.Na4 Bf3 29.Nc5 Nxc5 30.dxc5 Be4
