Traps and Zaps

It's always fun to see where the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) turns up. Most recently, it was in IM Gary Lane's latest book (see "The extraordinary and forgotten Jerome Gambit"), but 20 years ago it was in Bruce Pandolfini's Chess Openings: Traps and Zaps.
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 d6

A defense made famous by Joseph Henry Blackburne (see "Nobody expects the Jerome Gambit!" and "Flaws (Part II)") and most recently explored on this blog in "Jerome Gambit: Drilling Down" (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (9) and (10).

8.Qxh8 Qh4 9.d4

An improvement suggested by Munoz and Munoz in the August 1885 Brooklyn Chess Chronicle, repeated by Fletcher in Gambits Accepted (1954) and Druke in the November 1987 Gambit Revue, to give some early citations. (Actually, the move is rarely mentioned, but see "A Closer Look (Part V)".)

9...Nf6

Druke gave this move as an alternative to Fletcher's 9...Qxe4+ 10.Be3, saying that it came from analysis by Fritz 5. Of course, the two lines can transpose; in either case, as Hindemburg Melao, Jr., wrote in an intenet article (2003) on Amateur - Blackburne, London 1885 (not currently available), White's proper response is Nd2.

10.dxc5

Pandolfini appears to be the first to explore this move, and he uses it in a bit of a morality tale (after a few more moves) about grabbing material in his Chess Openings Traps and Zaps.

10...Qxe4+ 11.Be3 Qxg2 12.Rf1

Scenario: Don't be misled by White's extra Rook. It's a meaningless ornament. White is in serious trouble. His King is exposed and his cornered Queen is in danger of being trapped. The cruncher is 12...Bh3 which wins White's Queen by discovery form the a8-Rook. If White tries to save the Queen by capturing the Rook, 13.Qxa8 then 13...Qxf1+ 14.Kd2 Ne4 is mate.

Interpretation: White began with a very aggressive, sacrificial line of play which, because of Black's cavalier pawn move (6...g6), led to the gain of material. The price White had to pay was the removal of his Queen from the center of the board. Without his Queen being available for defense, White has to play carefully, and every move becomes critical. Instead of his h1-Rook, he should be more concerned with the potential trap of his Queen. The correct response to 11...Qxg2 is 12.Nc3 which later prevents Black's Knight from moving to e4 and giving mate. After 12...Qxh1+ 13.Kd2 Qxa1?(13...Qxh2 keeps Black's Queen in play), White turns the tables with 14.Bd4!. Black's extra Rook then means little in the face of White's strong counterattack.

Melao's analysis 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+? Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 (!!?) 7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qxh8 Qh4 9.d4 Nf6! ( 9...Qxe4+ 10.Be3 Nf6 11.Nd2 Qxg2 [11...Qxc2 12.0-0+-] 12.0-0-0+-) 10.Nd2!
a)10.dxc5 Qxe4+ 11.Be3 (11.Kd1 Bg4+ -+; 11.Kf1 Bh3 12.Qxa8 Bxg2+ 13.Kg1 Bh3 -+) 11...Qxg2 12.Rf1 Bh3 -+;
b)10.Be3 Bxd4! 11.Bxd4 Qxe4+ 12.Kd2 (12.Be3 Qxg2 -+) 12...Qxd4+ 13.Kc1 Qc5 14.b4 (14.Na3 b5 15.Re1 Bb7 -+) 14...Qc4 15.c3 (15.Na3 Qf4+ 16.Kb1 Qxb4+ -+) 15...b5 -+;
c)10.e5 dxe5! 11.0-0! Bd6! (11...Bxd4 12.Nd2 e4! 13.Qd8 Be5 14.g3 [14.f4 Bf5! 15.Qxa8 Bd4+ 16.Kh1 Ng4 17.h3 Qg3 18.hxg4 Qh4#] 14...Qh3 [14...Qg4 15.Nc4] 15.Nxe4! Qxf1+ [15...Nxe4 16.Qd5+] 16.Kxf1 Bh3+ 17.Ke1 Rxd8 18.Ng5+ Kg7 19.Nxh3 unclear) 12.f4 (12.Nd2 e4 13.g3 [13.f4 b6 -+] 13...Qh3 14.f3 e3 15.Ne4 Nxe4! 16.fxe4+ Qxf1+! 17.Kxf1 Bh3+ 18.Ke2 Rxh8 -+) 12...e4! 13.g3 Qh5 14.f5 gxf5 15.Bf4 Bxf4 16.Rxf4 [16.gxf4 e3 -+] 16...Qd1+ 17.Kg2 [17.Rf1 Qxd4+ 18.Kg2 f4 -+] 17...e3! 18.Qd8 Bd7! [18...e2! 19.Qxc7+ Kg6 20.Nc3! e1N+ 21.Kh1 Qxa1 22.Rf1! Be6 23.g4! fxg4 (23...Nxg4 24.d5) 24.h4! (24.Qe5 Nf3)] 19.Qxc7 (19.Qxa8 Bc6+ 20.Kh3 Qh5+ 21.Rh4 Bg2+! 22.Kxg2 Qe2+ 23.Kg1 [23.Kh3 Qf1#] 23...Qf2+ 24.Kh1 Qf1#) 19...Rc8 20.Qxb7 Rxc2+ 21.Kh3 Qh5+ 22.Rh4 Qe2 23.Qh1 f4+ 24.g4 Bxg4+ 25.Rxg4 Qxg4#;
10...Bxd4 11.0-0! (11.g3 Qh5 12.Qd8 Bxf2+! 13.Kxf2 Qc5+;11.Rf1 b5 [11...Bh3! 12.Qxa8 Bxg2 13.Qxb7! Bxf1 14.Qb3+! d5 15.Qg3] 12.Qd8 Bb6 13.e5 dxe5 14.Qd3 Qxh2 [14...e4 15.Qg3 +/=] 15.Qf3 Rb8 16.Ne4 Qh4 17.Nxf6 Qxf6 18.Qxf6+ Kxf6 unclear)

The extraordinary and forgotten Jerome Gambit

I always enjoy John Elburg's book reviews.

Of course, who wouldn't enjoy his look at International Master Gary Lane's latest title, The Greatest Ever Chess Tricks and Traps ? --

Gary Lane provides the reader in this greatest ever chess tricks and traps book with a amazing collection short cuts.
Some are well known as the seven move lost from the poor Ree against Petrosian,at the Wijk aan Zee tournament from 1971, but many others as for example the game Banks – Karmmark, Internet Blitz 2007, are brand new.
Where white went for the extraordinary and forgotten Jerome Gambit 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+?
These moves, as we can read in this entertaining work from Lane is named after the American player Alonzo Wheeler Jerome 1834-1902 of Paxton, Illinois, and was analysed in the American Chess Journal in 1874. It has to be remembered that in the 19th century people liked to attack and never defend.
This book from Lane is not only a very exciting game collection but above all, a very good read.
Nearly all major openings are divided with a instructive example of play and all games in this book are pleasantly indexed with names and openings.
All together I counted around 110 complete games where some are good for over two pages of text!
As for example the following victory in the opening: Skurski, Jan (2069) - Gasik, Piotr (2189) [B12] POL-ch sf Polanczyk (6), 09.11.2000 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.f3 dxe4 4.fxe4 e5 5.Nf3 exd4 6.Bc4 Bb4+ 7.c3 dxc3 8.Bxf7+ Kxf7 9.Qxd8 cxb2+ 10.Ke2 bxa1Q 11.Ng5+ Kg6 12.Qe8+ Kh6 13.Ne6+ g5 14.Bxg5# 1-0
As we can read in the book from Lane black has tried to avoid defeat at this point with no success.
Conclusion: This book is overloaded with unbelievable shortcuts!

Be careful what you wish for...

I am pleased that this blog is read all around the world (Mauritania: yes; Cape Verde Islands: yes; North Korea: no; China: no) and I hope readers try out a few of the strategies and tactics shared here by the Jerome Gambit Gemeinde – even the silly ideas, obviously reflective of Western decadence...

Sometimes, though, it seems that this broader knowledge of the Jerome Gambit (and its relatives) has a chance to come back and haunt me (see, for example, "Where are all of these Jeromes coming from?").

Today, for example, I was minding my own business, looking for a 3 0 blitz game on FICS – admittedly, way too fast a time control for an addled mind like my own – when suddenly familiarity struck!

leobrazer - perrypawnpusher
blitz 3 0, FICS, 2009

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6
The good old Two Knights Defense.

4.Bxf7+
Ha! says my opponent (in my imagination, anyhow).

Oh, bother! say I (to myself). In a three-minute game, of all things...

4...Kxf7 5.0-0 Bc5


Transposing to a "modern" Jerome Gambit: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.0-0 Nf6.

6.Nc3 Rf8 7.Ng5+

Trickier and stronger was the thematic 7.Nxe5+, when 7...Nxe5 8.d4 Bd6 9.f4 Nc6 10.e5 Kg8 11.exd6 cxd6 12.Be3 is okay for Black, although I would have probably chosen 7...Kg8 instead.

7...Kg8 8.d3 d5 9.exd5 Nxd5 10.Nxd5 Qxd5

Move quickly, avoid a blunder, I have an extra piece...

11.Bd2 Bf5 12.c4 Qd7 13.Bc3 Qxd3 14.Qxd3 Bxd3

Faster, faster, a piece up in the endgame still wins...

15.Rfe1 Bxc4

Too fast: missing 15...Bxf2+

16.b3 Bf7

Ditto.

17.Nf3 Rae8 18.Nxe5 Nxe5 19.Bxe5 Bd6

Better 19...Bxb3. The clock is ticking down, but I have more time than my opponent, who now slips...

20.Re4 Rxe5 21.Rxe5 Bxe5

Home free: just have to play Beat The Clock...

22.Re1 Re8 23.g3 Bd4 24.Rxe8+ Bxe8 25.Kg2 Bg6 26.Kf3 Bb1

We were banging out moves here.

27.Ke2 Bxa2 28.Kd3 Bf6 29.b4 Kf7 30.f4 Ke6 31.Ke4 Be7 32.f5+ Kf6 33.g4 Bxb4 34.h3 a5


There's enough time left for this to decide the game.

35.Kd4 a4 36.h4 h6 37.g5+ hxg5 38.hxg5+ Kxf5 39.Ke3 a3 40.Ke2 Bb3 41.Ke3 a2 42.g6 a1Q 43.Kf3 Qf1+ 44.Ke3 Bc5+ 45.Kd2 Qf3 46.Kc1 Qf2 47.Kb1 Qc2+ 48.Ka1 Qa2 checkmate

Whew!

It's a good thing I read this blog

It's a good thing that I caught Monday's post on the Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit (see "Please, don't do that..."), or I might have been unprepared for the following blitz encounter...

perrypawnpusher - adamzzzz
blitz 10 0, FICS 2009
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4


Tsk, tsk, tsk. Time to Jerome-ize.

4.Bxf7+

This caught my opponent by surprise. I could tell by his long think.

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Ke8 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Nxg6 hxg6 8.Qxg6+


Discussed and recommended on the jeromegambit.blogspot.com blog.

8...Ke7 9.Qg5+ Ke8 10.Qe5+ Qe7 11.Qxd4

White has 4 pawns for his piece, and Black has yet to get over his sense of surprise.

11...Bg7 12.Qc4 Kd8 13.Nc3 Nf6 14.O-O c6 15.d4 d5


Of course, this move would be stronger with the Queen on d8.

16.exd5 Nxd5 17.Nxd5 cxd5 18.Qxd5+ Qd7 19.Bg5+ Kc7 20.Qc5+ Qc6 21.Qxc6+ bxc6 22.c3 Rb8

A blitz slip, although it takes me a lucky moment to notice it.

23.b3 Rh5 24.Bf4+ Kb7 25.Bxb8 Kxb8 26.Rae1 Ba6 27.Re8+ Kc7 28.Rfe1 Bh6 29.R8e5 Rxe5 30.Rxe5


30...dxe5 was probably more consistent.

The rest of the game features two unencumbered Bishops against a Rook and a lot of targets, er, pawns. Fortune favored the Jerome...

30...Bd2 31.c4 Bc3 32.Re4 Bb7 33.d5 cxd5 34.cxd5 Bxd5 35.Re7+ Kb6 36.h4 Bf6 37.Rd7 Be6 38.Rd6+ Kc7 39.Rxe6 Black resigns

Jerome Gambit for Dummies (3)

The difficulty in the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) after 4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.d4 can be illustrated by the following diagram, after Black's best move, 6...Qh4:



White will most likely get one piece back, but it's sobering to realize that he sacrificed two pieces to get to this position...

On the other hand, if the first player opts for 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Black has many "refutations" at his disposal, but need only remember one: 6...g6 7.Qxe5 Qe7 - Whistler's Defense - to have a winning game.


So - What's a Jerome Gambit Gemeinde to do?? (Stay tuned.)

Jerome Gambit for Dummies (2)

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

This is the first Critical Position in the Jerome Gambit. Although 99% of the time (according to my database) Black captures the Bishop, the move is not forced. It is simply a choice for the second player between having an objectively winning game (4...Kxf7) and having the worse position (after 4...Kf8/4...Ke7 5.Bb3). Yet a few defenders will adopt the sly attitude If he wants me to take the Bishop, then I won't take it. There is some "psychology" in this, too: the Jerome Gambiteer suddenly finds himself or herself "stuck" with a calm, but immesurably "better" game than had been expected a move before. This change of fortune can take some getting used to. Those who resist may wish to resort to 5.Bxg8 or 5.Qe2 (if 5...Kxf7 6.Qc4+); or transpose to the Evans Jerome Gambit with 5.b4. 

  4...Kxf7 This is the second Critical Position. The "classical" Jerome Gambit continues with 5.Nxe5 (about 84% of the games in my database) while "modern" Jerome Gambits continue with alternatives such as 5.Nc3, 5.d3, or 5.0-0. For the record, after a very long think (over 12 hours) Deep Rybka 3.0 Aquarium assesses Black as being 1.91 pawns better after 5.Nxe5+ as well as after 5.Nc3. It sees White being only 1.72 pawns worse after 5.d3 or 5.0-0.

One fifth of a pawn doesn't seem like a lot to me, and I still prefer the complications of 5.Nxe5+. Jerome Gambiteers who feel they can knuckle down and simply outplay their opponents with the "modern" variations are free to disagree with me.

5.Nxe5+

This is the third Critical Position. Black's most frequent response is the logical 5...Nxe5, but he has alternatives in 5...Kf8, 5...Ke8 and 5...Ke7. The first of these "others" is a respected defense going back to Jerome - Brownson, Iowa 1875 (1/2-1/2, 29). The other two are blunders that give White the advantage after 6.Qh5.

After 5.Nxe5+ Kf8, the Banks Variation (see "Jerome Gambit and Vlad Tepes..." and "Jerome Gambit, Vlad Tepes... and Garlic!") is tempting, but probably Alonzo Wheeler Jerome's 6.Nxc6 is best.

5...Nxe5 This is the fourth Critical Position. White most frequently follows up with 6.Qh5+, although 6.d4 is also played, and there are a number of rare other moves.

Jerome Gambit for Dummies (1)

Bobby Fischer used to play with the white pieces against the Najdorf Sicilian (1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6) - and win. Then he would take the black pieces in another game - and win with them. Some players - and some openings - are like that.

The Jerome Gambit is not. If you have the white pieces and play the Jerome against a knowledgeable and booked-up opponent, chances are that you are going to have a rough time of it – unless you're playing a "weaky" (Bobby's term) that you've given Jerome Gambit odds to. *

Playing 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+, you are counting on the element of surprise, shock, and awe to level the playing field. Therefore, you need to be aware of every trick, trap, and pitfall (or "caltrop" as Tim McGrew used to say) available to you so that you take advantage of every chance that comes your way.

Hence this series, "The Jerome Gambit For Dummies". (No jokes, please. We know, we know...)

* Some thoughts on the art of odds-giving, from the age of the Jerome Gambit:

Chess At Odds of Pawn and Move compiled by Baxter-Ray (1891)
Considering the large number of works published for the purpose of teaching a knowledge of the game of Chess, it must appear strange to the ordinary student to find so little information available in regard to Openings at Odds. Odds-giving has never received the attention it deserves from the analysts of the game. Yet it is very popular, and is rapidly growing in practice ; indeed, it is absolutely necessary for every Club, and a very large number of private players, to regularly introduce odds into their games, with, at present, little or nothing to guide them as to the best means of commencing play.

A Popular Introduction to the Study and Practice of Chess. Forming A Compendium of the Science of the Game by Samuel Boden (1851)
One may often hear persons declare that they think it cowardly to take odds, that they had rather be beaten on even terms ; or that the removing of a piece, in odds, must spoil the game. All this is sheer nonsense, and only bespeaks utter ignorance of Chess. A game played even, where one party should be rendering the odds of a piece in order to give the other a chance, will have no interest for the one, and little pleasure for the other. If the weaker player has no chance, of course the stronger player can have no sport.

The Australian Chess Annual Edited by H. B. Bignold (1896)
If the handicap given is a fair measure of the difference in skill of the respective players, the odds giver can only hope to neutralise his deficiency in material by superiority of development. Assuming he has the move, it immediately becomes a matter of the utmost importance to adopt a suitable opening. But what is a suitable opening ? The answer to this will vary with circumstances, and on the player's ability to gauge them will to a great extent depend his success as an odds-giver. It is very certain that every player has some particular style of opening, which is in consonance with his turn of thought, and in which he will appear to the best advantage. If you can form some idea of your adversary's penchant, and avoiding it, lead him on to less familiar ways, your chances are, perforce, improved. Assuming you are the better player, if it should seem to you that you have both the same cast of mind, it is a matter of very nice consideration whether it will pay you better to meet him on his own ground, which is also yours, or lead him on to ways strange to both of you, trusting to your greater skill to gain an advantage on the spur of the moment. In choosing a gambit it should be borne in mind that if the one adopted is familiar to the adversary, the game is almost hopelessly compromised, since the initial difference force is already increased without any positional recompense. The writer has a lively recollection of giving a 5th class player a Rook and Knight, himself being in the 1st class, and receiving 14 moves of book defence to the Allgaier he ventured on ! In this dilemma, though it may appear fanciful, perhaps your adversary may himself give you the least hint. If he is a careful, cautious man, square-jawed, deliberate of manner, apt to weigh his words — perhaps even attach too much weight to them — given to loading his pipe with the utmost deliberation, and lighting it as if it were a solemn function, is it too much to premise that he belongs to the class that loves to castle early and oppose a solid phalanx to the advancing foe ? Perchance an Allgaier, or a Kieseritzky, whereby his cherished scheme of castling is rendered impracticable, may utterly rout him ! If he is of the opposite temperament — nervous, painfully excitable, given to squirming with impatience should you appear unduly slow to move — a Giuoco, with its orderly development, may entice him from his entrenchments to be more easily dispatched. In general, of course, he will belong to neither extreme, and classifying him will be a work of some difficulty, but to one who cares to succeed, a knowledge of his rivals can never be without advantage, in chess or the sterner warfare that it dimly shadows forth.