London Calling... Nine Months of Blog

Dear Jerome Gambit Gemeinde,

Many "thank yous" again, to all readers and members of the Gemeinde, world-wide, who have sent games, analysis, and Comments to this blog. Your support has been quit gratifying – feel free to continue contributing.

My hope is that the sense of adventure and enjoyment that embodies the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) carries over to your chess play in general – and that if you get a chance to play bold, attacking chess, that you do so with gusto!

Certainly, playing Jerome's Double Gambit has made its mark on my games – which will continue to appear here on this blog on a daily basis, along with more Jeromiana and whatnot. (That includes more chapters from Jerome Gambit for Dummies, too.)

I hate chess...

I hate chess.

Well, not exactly. Not yet. But, almost. Some days...

Take a look a the following position that arose in a recent game of mine on FICS.That's me with the white pieces, stumbling around with what should have been an attack. Reminds you a bit of that comment by Harry Bird, no?

Place the contents of the chess box in a hat, shake them up vigorously, pour them on the board from a height of two feet -- and you get the style of Steinitz.

What a mess! Chess masters who say that they talk to their chess pieces, or that their pieces talk to them: what would they be hearing now??

17.Bxe6

Light-squared White Bishop: I suppose you're all wondering why I called you together today...

Dark-squared Black Bishop: Excuse me, I think that there's something you left off of the agenda...

17...Bxd6

You see, things like this shouldn't happen.

Stumble-bum players like me shouldn't knowingly sacrifice their Queens like this.

It's just not natural.

18.Bxf7+ Kh6 19.Nxd6 g6

You have no idea how much better I felt when I learned that Black's last move is not best. If he had played 19...Qe5 instead, he could have returned the Queen with 20.Ne6+ Qxf4 21.Nxf4; or he could have tried 19...Qf6 20.Nge4+ g5 21.Nxf6.

In both cases, though, White would have still been better. The problem is, my Queen sac was correct.

20.Nxf5+ gxf5

Tossing in the towel. He could have delayed the mate with 20...Kh5 21.h3 Ne5 22.Ng7+Kh6 23.N5e6+ g5 24.Bxg5 checkmate.

21.Ne6 checkmate

I'm glad I got that out of my system.

To belabor a point...

Endgames.

What I know about them would fill a thimble. Almost.

And most of what I know concerns endings featuring Rook pawns. See "One good blunder deserves another" and "All's well that ends well". Mickey Mouse stuff.

So why do I keep running into that stuff in my games??

Case in point: the following position comes from a recent typical FICS blitz game where I am getting destroyed by a much better player.

Ho-hum. White has only to play 58.Qa1, blocking my pawn, and then find the inevitable mate-in-ten-(or whatever)-moves that follows.

Instead, my opponent shows an unfamiliarity with another odd Rook-pawn ending, playing the Queen check 58.Qb8+.

Alas for him, it turns out that this allows a crucial tempo for Black to get his King to the second rank, 58...Kc2 and now the game is drawn.*

The usual strategy in Queen + Rook vs an advanced King + pawn-on-the-seventh/second rank is for the Queen to approach the enemy king by making a zig-zagging series of checks while threatening to win the pawn.

Eventually the defending monarch (dodging the checks and protecting the pawn) will need to step in front of his pawn, blocking its promotion. At that point, the White King can make a move toward where the action is.

The Black King will then move and unblock his pawn – but the White Queen will check him back there, using the found tempo to then move her King another step closer.

This takes a bit of time, but it is as relentless as the tides. Eventually the pawn will be captured, or the White King checkmated.

Unless the pawn is a Rook pawn or a Bishop pawn. Then, there is the possibility of a stalemate.

59.Qc7+ Kb1 60.Qb6+ Ka1

61.Qg1+ Kb2 62.Qf2+ Kb1 63.Qe1+ Kb2 64.Qd2+

Hoping for 64...Ka1 Qc1 checkmate!

64...Kb1 65.Qb4+ Ka1

Frustrating, isn't it?

66.Qc3+ Kb1 67.Qb3+ Ka1 But for a tempo!

68.Qa3 Kb1 69.Kf5 a1Q 70.Qxa1+ Kxa1 draw

(*This was a 3 0 blitz game, and my opponent had an advantage in time by move 60. Had he been more familiar with this endgame and simply played out his moves quickly – despite being aware that such a strategy would lead to no advantage – he would likely have won the game on time. I considered his 69th move a sporting, gentlemanly gesture.)

One good blunder deserves another...

I'm not an endgame maven.

I have plenty of endgame books, but I have worked my way through only two or three of them.

Still, I know a few little things about endgames. Especially the ones that "haunt" me.

Take the following position. It's from a recently completed FICS blitz game of mine, and it's pretty simple.

Despite the fact that it was snowing outside, I had some food on the grill and I was taking a break inside to warm up. Why not a quick online game of chess before dinner?

When I reached this position, I thought "My opponent's played well, I should force the draw, split the point, and get back to the chops."

Wrong!

Of course I played 36.c5 – which does lead to a draw – but in my careless "thinking" I overlooked that the alternative 36.b5 wins.

After the game's simple 36...bxc5 37.bxc5 things were clear: I can trade my c-pawn for Black's e-pawn, and then capture his h-pawn, but my remaining passer will not be able to get to its queening square (see "All's well that ends well" for a similar theme) without stalemating the enemy King – or being stalemated myself


About 25 years ago I played in a small tournament that saw, in the final round, a similar position. The odd thing was that if Black could have held the draw back then, 8 out of 10 (or 12) of us would have tied for first place (and probably each would have won enough prize money to spend on a call home from a public phone booth).


37...Kd5 38.c6 Kxc6 39.Kxe4 Kd6 40.Kf4 Ke6 41.Kg4 Ke5 42.Kxh4 Kf4

Of course, Black can, instead, race to h8 and keep the pawn from getting there. In this position, he can keep the White King from getting out from in front of the pawn by shadowing him up and down their respective files.

43.Kh5 Kg3

Huh?

44.h4

The cat is out of the bag.

44...Kf4 45.Kg6 Kg4 46.h5 Kf4 47.h6 Black resigns

(Dinner was great, too.)

Attacking the King

A big hope of someone who plays the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) is that the sacrifice of a piece at f7 will put the enemy King in sufficient danger that a successful attack can follow.

Sometimes, it actually does.

perrypawnpusher - vypux
blitz 5 7, FICS, 2009

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

Jerome Gambit 101.

5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6


7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 Ne7

Last seen in my game against TheChessInnovator (see "The Black Knight"), this is one of many ways for Black to return a piece.

Better for Black here appears to be the more mainline 8...Qf6 or 8...Qh4+

9.Qxe5+ Kc6 10.d4


Again missing, as I did against TheChessInnovator, the superior 10.Qc3 (with the threat of b4, winning the Bishop) which would have given me an advantage.

10...d6 11.d5+


This is the move that I had relied upon, hoping to chase the enemy monarch to the Queenside. The plan worked, but Rybka's suggestion of 11.Qxg7 (leading to an edge for the second player) shows that my chances had been reduced by my 10th move to pawn-grubbing.
11...Kb5
Too cooperative. Instead, Rybka's 11...Kd7 12.Qxg7 Qe8 13.Rf1 Rg8 14.Qxh7 Kd8 looks about even, if messy.

12.a4+ Kb6

Again, probably not best. If the Black King goes to a6 instead, it will be more difficult to get at him. Of course, I'd still prefer to be White. As the song goes, I'd rather be a hammer than a nail...
Now, any player with attacking pretensions has to be thinking: there's got to be something to find here.
13.a5+ Kb5
Black's King looks terribly unsafe -- and it is.

14.Qc3 Bb4 15.Na3+ Kxa5

Leading to mate, but surrendering the piece with 15...Ka6 16.Qxb4 led to a grim and ultimately losing position as well.

16.Nc4+ Kb5 17.Ra5+ Bxa5 18.Qxa5+ Kxc4 19.b3+ Kd4 20.Qb4 checkmate

Smooth Moves

Brian Wall takes a look at a Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) blitz game that was played at the Internet Chess Club...

From : Brian Wall

Sent : Wednesday, July 14, 2004 10:04 PM

To : smoothmoves06@hotmail.com, BrianWallChess@Yahoogroups.com
Subject : [BrianWallChess]

The next game is an effort from smooth-moves06 - He read about the Jerome Gambit in my emails and gave it a try...

smooth-moves06 - Zorz
ICC blitz 5 0, ICC, 2004

The Opening - The Jerome Gambit, about 150 years old.

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 7.Qxc5

Not so bad for a Jerome Gambit - 2 pawns plus a displaced King for a piece. I still like Black but I've seen worse.

7...d6 8.Qe3 Nf6 9.f4 Nxe4

Ooops

10.0-0 Re8 11.f5 Nf8 12.Qb3+ Kf6 13.d3 Nc5 14.Qc3+ Kf7 15.Qc4+ Kf6
16.h4

Smooth-moves06 is making a fight of it, giving his opponent no peace of mind.

16...h6 17.g4 Re2 18.g5+ Ke7 19.f6+ gxf6 20.gxf6+ Kd7 21.Qf7+ Kc6 22.d4 Be6 23.Qh5

Time -
White - smooth-moves06 - 84 seconds -
Black - Zorz - - 70 seconds

Zorz gets a phone call or freaks out and spends 54 seconds here, dooming him to lose on time.

23...Re5 24.dxe5 dxe5 25.Qf3+ Bd5 26.Qc3 Black
resigns

Danke!

The German language chess web site Schacharena.de has a current discussion of the Busch-Gass Gambit (see"Worth A Second Look..." parts 1, 2, and 3) in its Forum area, and Schacharena member Schroeder has kindly mentioned (and linked to) this blog's contribution to the discussion – which, in turn, has led some Schacharena.de readers to stop by JeromeGambit.blogspot.com.

Welcome!

And thank you, Schachfreund Schroeder!