A GM Faces the Jerome Gambit (Part 1)

How many players of grandmaster strength have faced the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+)?

I can think of Joseph Henry Blackburne, author of the notorious 1884 dismantling of the opening.

(Please, let's not revisit the "urban legend" that Alekhine lost to the Jerome. Thank you.)

Of course, if we step outside the main lines and include the Open Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit (otherwise known as the Noa Gambit, or the Monck Gambit) - 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+ - then we can add , Charousek, Euwe, Lasker, Marco, Marshall, Tarrasch, Teichmann, and Zukertort, for starters.

For today, let's not go there, either.

Still, I have just learned of a Jerome Gambit, played at bullet speed, online, against a grandmaster.

Let me share some recent exchanges of email with the legendary Australian "Cliff Hardy", player of the white pieces. There will be some move references, but do not let them distract you - I will be presenting the game, with annotations, in due time.

Hi Rick! 

Sorry to inundate you with another game but, after playing the Jerome Gambit for years, I finally got my first chance to play a Jerome Gambit against a GM! It was GM Yasser Quesada Perez, from Cuba.  

Unfortunately, I didn't win 😭... 

Because GM Quesada Perez is quite new to Lichess - our game was only his 15th bullet game on the site - his bullet rating on Lichess is comparatively low for his standard of chess (his standard FIDE rating is much higher at 2572) and so I expect it will soon probably go a lot higher than it was at the time of this game.

Of course, I replied quickly

Hi, Cliff, 

Very glad to receive your game against Quesada Perez! 

Certainly provides one answer to the question "How would a GM respond to the Jerome Gambit??" 

Of course, it still leaves unanswered things like "How can you play such a coherent game with 1 second a move thinking time?" 

I have been going over the game, and will try to treat it with both a sense of respect and wonder when I post it on my blog - with you, your opponent, and my good pal, Stockfish 10, playing way over my head, it's a bit of a challenge to make sense of, and then share with readers. But, that's the whole point, I guess. 

[Black's 9th move] gave me a chuckle. It's a novelty, according to The Database, although your game later could transpose into a couple of online games from 2017. I can imagine the GM thinking: The only thing wrong with my position is that White may think he has an attack; so, let's exchange queens, and the rest will work itself out. No need for concrete analysis, especially in a bullet game.

Chances are, similar thinking produced [Black's 6th move]. It would be scary think a GM actually had a refutation to the Jerome Gambit in his repertoire. Most likely he thought (or just reacted) he'd settle for something reasonable, and figure the rest out later. I have seen that kind of thinking in numerous defenses to the Jerome - but the players were not super strong, and the "figuring" was much less effective.Stockfish 10 raises it's eyebrows only at [Black's 17th move], and its recommended followup for White is complicated and not at all clear to me, at least at this point - reaching =/+ in some lines, which has got to be the same as "=" in a bullet game (unless I'm playing, when it would be "-++" )

Nice game. Good to see you taking it to "the man". I mean - why not? I would do the same - although the comment was never truer than, for me, "After 1.e4, White's game is in its final throes". 

Thanks for sharing. 

I hope to learn more, and it'll show up in the blog. 

Rick

And Cliff came back with

Hi Rick! 

I was initially afraid you might not want to see the game, as it was a loss where I never really even got a great position, but I was quite excited to finally get a chance to play a GM with the Jerome. I was also quite glad I didn't botch it by just hanging a queen on move 8 or so 😉. 

Yes, I think he made it all up because he seemed to spend a bit more time on the first few moves. Now that Lichess shows move times, I can see that he took a "whopping" 2.0 seconds to play [his 6th move] 😉 , so it was one of his slowest moves in the game 😉. He spent even longer on [his 9th move]  (2.9 seconds on that move) so I guess he was trying to work out some sort of defence that would work best for him, like you said. Unfortunately, I tried to move too quickly and played [my 10th move] there - although who knows, technically [an alternate 10th move] is not that much better a move anyway... 

Yes, I noticed with the analysis that the computer didn't like [Black's 17th move] - but that was way over my head too! 😉 It was good fun to try against the GM and I will try to remember to throw in [the alternate 10th move] next time [his 9th move] is played. 

Also, it shows how there are so many GM's in the world - there's always some you've never heard of - or, at least, I'd never heard of this guy before this game! 

Bye

Me

[To be continued...] 

Jerome Gambit: Discussion Crasher

The Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) continues to show up in the oddest places. The other day I was reading an interesting post by John Torrie, at chesstalk.com. It started out with a reference to Bobby Fischer, but quickly moved on to an interesting game that featured what is sometimes called the Nachmanson Gambit (see a reference in my post "Kaissiber!"). In the middle of the game - Torrie reflected upon the Jerome Gambit, because of a tactical similarity. (It seems likely that Mr. Torrie is familiar with this blog.) 

I have posted the earliest example of the Nachmanson Gambit that I have been able to find, at the end of this discussion; although I have found no information on Nachmanson, himself. I also dug up an earlier game with a different opening line, but with a similar tactical theme, which you will also find at the end.  

John Torrie  

Wednesday, 21st November, 2018, 11:20 AM 

Apparently the Fischer vs Allan encounter is not the only memorable game from Montreal, Feb. 1964. Dan Elman says that he also squared off with Mr. Allan at the Montreal Chess Club. The first game, with Mr. Allan venturing his Two Knight's Defence, went like this: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.d4 exd4 5.O-O Nxe4 6.Nc3 (Dan picked up this peculiarity in the early '60s while he was 'resident chess player' at a Belgium cafe. The owners of the cafe had a deal with Dan, if he played chess with the patrons for wagers of liquor, he could have free lodgings with light fare. Usually the patrons drank beer, while Dan drank ginger ale disguised as 'whisky'. Dan drank a lot of ginger ale while making a lot of whisky sales for the cafe.) 6...dxc3 7.Bxf7+ (Hey Jerome! Jerome! Will the real Jerome please stand up: The 150 year old Jerome Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 with attacking chances for white, was the brainchild of Alonzo Wheeler Jerome who also had the distinction of proposing - not without merit - that a pawn be allowed to promote to a king when it reached the 8th rank.) 7...Kxf7 8.Qd5+ Ke8 9.Re1 Be7 10.Rxe4 d6 11.Bg5 cxb3 12.Rae1 h6 13.Bxe7 Nxe7 14.Qh5+ Kf8 15.Ng5 g6 16.Qf3+ Nf5 (Dan points out that if the bishop blocks, Ne6+ forks the queen.) 17.Qc3 Rg8 18.Re8+ Qxe8 19.Qf6+ resigns. (After 19...Qf7, 20.Nh7 makes a model mate.)...

Trajkovic, Mihajlo - Trifunovic, Petar

Belgrade, 1952
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.O-O Nxe4 6.Nc3 Nxc3 7.bxc3 d5 8.Bb5 Be7 9.Nxd4 Bd7 10.Bd3 Ne5 11.Nf5 Bxf5 12.Bxf5 Nc4 13.Rb1 O-O 14.Bd3 Nb6 15.Qg4 Re8 16.a4 a5 17.Be3 Bf6 18.Bxb6 cxb6 19.c4 d4 20.Rfe1 Qd6 21.g3 Rxe1+ 22.Rxe1 g6 23.Qf3 Rb8 24.Qf4 Qxf4 25.gxf4 Kf8 26.Kg2 Re8 27.Rxe8+ Kxe8 28.Be4 Ke7 29.Bxb7 Kd6 30.Kf3 Kc5 31.Ke2 Kxc4 32.f5 g5 33.h3 Kc3 34.Ba6 Kxc2 35.Bd3+ Kc3 36.Bb5 Be5 37.Bd3 h5 38.f3 Bg3 39.Bb5 f6 40.Ba6 Bh2 41.Bb5 Bg1 42.Ba6 Kb4 43.Bb5 Kc5 44.Be8 h4 45.Bb5 Kd5 46.f4 gxf4 47.Kf3 Bh2 48.Bd3 Kc5 49.Ke4 Kb4 50.Bb5 Kc3 51.Be2 f3 52.Bxf3 b5 53.axb5 a4 54.Bh5 d3 55.b6 a3 White resigned

McConnell, James - Zukertort, Johannes Hermann
New Orleans, 1884
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bb4 5.a3 Bxc3 6.dxc3 Nxe4 7.Bxf7+ Kxf7 8.Qd5+ Ke8 9.Qxe4 d5 10.Qa4 Rf8 11.Nxe5 Qe7 12.f4 Bd7 13.O-O Nxe5 14.Qd4 Nc6 15.Qxd5 Be6 16.Qb5 a6 17.Qxb7 Qc5+ 18.Be3 Qxe3+ 19.Kh1 Qb6 20.Qxb6 cxb6 21.Rae1 Kd7 White resigned

5% New (Part 1)

I am always looking for something new in the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ and friends) universe. Before I share any discoveries, though, I check to make sure that I haven't already passed the information along. With over 2,200 blog posts, I can't keep everything in my head. Here's a good example.

Let's start with a Jerome-ish line from the Two Knight's Defense (or the Italian Game, or the Four Knights Game):  1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+ . It, and similar positions, are discussed under the "fork trick" in Pawn Power in Chess, by Hans Kmoch (1949).

For a brief introduction as it relates to the Jerome, see the post "Jerome Gambit vs Two Knights Defense (Part 3)". Follow that up with "Further Explorations" (Parts 1, 2, 3,  4 & 5). 

A few years ago, Tim Sawyer, a Blackmar Diemer Gambit expert, on his blog, gave the line that we are looking at today the descriptive name the "Open Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit". He was influenced by a game where "jeromed" played the OIFKJG against him.

Tim mentioned that Bill Wall - no stranger to the Jerome Gambit - instead calls the line the "Noa Gambit".

I am guessing that Bill is referring to the following game (there are probably others) by the Hungarian Chess master:

Noa, Josef - Makovetz, Gyula
DSB-07.Kongress, Dresden, 1892
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+ Kxf7 6.Nxe4 d5 7.Ng3 e4 8.Ng1 h5 9.d4 h4 10.Nf1 Qf6 11.c3 Ne7 12.Ne3 Kg8 13.Ne2 c6 14.h3 g5 15.Rf1 Bh6 16.f3 exf3 17.Rxf3 Qg6 18.b3 Rh7 19.Ba3 g4 20.hxg4 Bxg4 21.Nxg4 Qxg4 22.Ng3 Rf7 23.Bxe7 Rxe7+ 24.Ne2 Qxg2 25.Rf2 Qg1+ 26.Rf1 Qg3+ 27.Rf2 Rf8 White resigned

I am happy to now add that Examples of Chess Master-Play (1894), by Charles Thomas Blanshard, says of 5.Bxf7+ "The text move, a hobby of Dr. Noa, develops Black's game." (I have not turned up any more examples, however.)

It turned out, however, that I was able to identify a precursor to Noa's play:

Zoltowski, E - Zukertort, Johannes
Berlin, 1869
1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+ Kxf7 6.Nxe4 Be7 7.Nfg5+ Bxg5 8.Qh5+ g6 9.Qxg5 d5 10.Qxd8 Rxd8 11.Ng5+ Kg7 12.d3 Nd4 13.O-O Nxc2 14.Rb1 Re8 15.b3 Bf5 16.Rd1 Nb4 17.Ba3 Nxd3 18.g4 Nxf2 19.Rxd5 Nxg4 20.Rbd1 Ne3 21.Rd7+ Bxd7 22.Rxd7+ Kh6 23.Nf7+ Kh5 24.Bc1 Nf5 25.Ng5 h6 26.Rh7 Rad8 White resigned

To date, I have not found any references to the "Zoltowski Gambit".

I also shared a game which was about as close as any sort of Jerome Gambit was going to get to a World Champion:

Fischer, Robert James - Ames, D.
USA, 1955
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bc4 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+ Kxf7 6.Nxe4 d5 7.Neg5+ Kg8 8.d4 h6 9.Nh3 Bg4 10.dxe5 Nxe5 11.Nf4 c6 12.h3 Nxf3+ 13.gxf3 Bf5 14.Be3 Bb4+ 15.c3 Ba5 16.Rg1 Qe8 17.Nxd5 Qf7 18.Nf4 Re8 19.Qb3 Bc7 20.Qxf7+ Kxf7 21.Nh5 g6 22.Ng3 Bxh3 23.O-O-O Rd8 24.Rxd8 Bxd8 25.Rh1 Bg2 26.Rxh6 Rxh6 27.Bxh6 Bxf3 28.Be3 drawn

Of course, Bobby wasn't even a teenager when he played that game.

So - what's new?

I recently discovered, in Pollock Memories: A Collection of Chess Games, Problems, &c., &c., Including His Matches with Eugene Delmar, Jackson Showalter, and G.H.D. Gossip (1899), by William Henry Krause Pollock, edited by F. F. Rowland, an undated/unplaced game between Pollock and an Amateur, with the introduction: "The following is a very fine example, known in Dublin years ago as the 'Monck Gambit' ." 

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+ Kxf7 6.Nxe4 d5 7.Nfg5+ Kg6 8.Qf3 dxe4 9.Qf7+ Kxg5

"White now mates in ten moves."

10.d4+ Kh4 11.h3 Bb4+ 12.Kf1 g6 13.g3+ Kh5 14.g4+ Kh4 15.Qb3 Bc3 16.Qxc3 e3 17.Qxe3 Bxg4 18.hxg4+ Kxg4 19.Qe4 checkmate

I will have more on the Monck Gambit next post. For now, it will suffice to recall Monck's comment about the Jerome Gambit from the Preston Guardian, April 26, 1882, concerning the game Lowe,E - Cudmore,D, correspondence, 1881

Every form of the Jerome Gambit is, I believe, unsound and this is no exception.

[to be continued]

Further Explorations (Part 4)

One challenge to naming 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+ the "Noa Gambit" as opposed to the "Open Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit" (see "Further Explorations" Part 1, 2, and 3) is the following, earlier, game.

Zoltowski,E - Zukertort,J 
Berlin, 1869


1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+ 

5...Kxf7 6.Nxe4 Be7 7.Nfg5+ Bxg5 8.Qh5+ g6 9.Qxg5 d5 10.Qxd8 Rxd8 11.Ng5+ Kg7 

12.d3 Nd4 13.0-0 Nxc2 14.Rb1 Re8 15.b3 Bf5 16.Rd1 Nb4 17.Ba3 Nxd3 

18.g4 Nxf2 19.Rxd5 Nxg4 20.Rbd1 Ne3 21.Rd7+ Bxd7 22.Rxd7+ Kh6 23.Nf7+ Kh5 24.Bc1 Nf5 25.Ng5 h6 26.Rh7 Rad8 0-1

So, should the title of the line stay with the traditional, or follow the earlier game example, or be based on similarity in tactical themes?


Who was that future World Champion who played the line, anyhow?


(Still grabbing graphics from a the Cafe Press website. Check them out.)

Montgomery Major Attack

Even when it comes to the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+), and especially when it comes to related openings, there always seems something new to discover.

Imagine my surprise when, thumbing through John Lutes' Tennsion Gambit I encountered the following line of play

1.e4 d5 2.Nf3

This is the Tennison Gambit, which also can be reached via the Zukertort Opening, i.e. 1.Nf3 d5 2.e4.

2...dxe4 3.Ng5 e5

There is a superficial similarity to the Budapest Gambit (1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5) here, with colors reversed, although the fact that Black has not played ...c7-c5 in the Tennison actually strengthens his position, as the traditional ...Bb4+ in the Budapest – Bb5+ in the Tennison – is more easily met.

4.Nxf7 Kxf7 5.Qh5+

Things are already beginning to look a little Jerome-ish, moreso after 5...g6 6.Qxe5, when White looks forward to two pawns for his sacrificed piece and play against Black's vulnerable King.

The Montgomery Major Attack is named after an early editor of Chess Life, who published his analysis of the line in Chess Correspondent in the early 1960s.

The Game is Afoot!

More information generously provided by a poster at rec.games.chess.misc on "A Small Clue to Follow..."

I am guessing that this is the St Louis chess player AF Reed, whose name appears often in the St Louis Globe-Democrat chess column. He was a regular solver of the problems in the column, is noted as losing to such players as Max Judd and Zukertort. More specifically, he was one of the leading members of the South St Louis Chess Club; not in the sense of chess strength, but as a regular attendee. If you are in St Louis, he was part of a photo group of S St Louis players donated to the St Louis Chess Club; the picture may still exist somewhere.

The most interesting thing I know about AF Reed is his uniqe money- raising idea. He bought a silver pitcher, and you would play Reed games; if you won, you got a raffle ticket for the pitcher, and if you lost you paid 50 cents. The pitcher was won by AH Robbins.

Can't tell you much more about him, I'm afraid. The Globe-Democrat columns end in 1888. I had computer access to some St Louis Republican columns from later, but I didn't realize that I would lose access to them and thus did not make copies.

If you are near a university with access to the Readex database of 19th century newspapers, this has the St Louis Republican, and you can try a word search for
Reed.

Jerry Spinrad

Many, many thanks Jerry!