Opening Report

Wandering the Internet, looking for something new on the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+), I came across the "Scacchi: Enciclopedia pratica dei Gambetti" website which contained an Opening Report on the Jerome. It contained a wealth of information, including:

1. Statistics and History
1.1 Statistics Games
1.2 Oldest games
1.3 Newest games
1.4 Current popularity
1.5 Most frequent players (White)
1.6 Most frequent players (Black)
2. Ratings and Performance
2.1 Average ratings and performance
2.2 Games with highest average rating
3. Result Trends
3.1 Result lengths and frequencies
3.2 Shortest wins (White)
3.3 Shortest wins (Black)
4. Moves and Themes
4.1 Move orders reaching the report position
4.2 Moves from the report position
4.3 Positional Themes
4.4 EndgamesMaterial at the end of each game:
5. Theory Table

It was produced by using the free SCID database, which in this case contained 4,011,859 games, and showed the Jerome Gambit scoring almost 67%!

Admittedly the Jerome's "Frequency in all years" of the database was "once every 1,337,286 games."

That works out to statistics based on – how many Jerome Gambit games??

Oh, never mind...

Burnt Jerome Attack

As opposed to Fried, of course...

As I wrote in "Fried Jerome Attack":

Not everyone is interested in facing the Jerome Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ (see, for example "It's a good thing I read this blog"). One way to avoid it is to play Philidor's Defense, 2...d6, instead of allowing the Italian Game with 2...Nc6. Still, one shouldn't provoke too much of an attacking spirit in the heart of the Jerome Gambiteer...

This miniature game updates and corrects a note that I gave to perrypawnpusher - azzaonnet, blitz, FICS 2009.


perrypawnpusher - LWAKE
blitz 13 0, FICS, 2009

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bc4 Nf6

4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5

A risky move against a Jerome Gambiteer.

6.Nxf7 Kxf7 7.Qf3+ Ke8

Black's King must venture into danger to hold onto the piece: 7...Ke8 8.Qxd5 Qxd5 9.Bxd5, as in perrypawnpusher - xPOGOx, FICS 2009, simply leads to a Queenless middlegame a pawn down – from "Fried Jerome Attack"

8.Bxd5


Simple – and stronger than 8.Qxd5.

8...Qf6 9.Bxb7 Bxb7 10.Qxb7 Bc5



11.0-0 Kf7 12.Qxa8 Rf8 13.Qd5+ Black resigned


graphic by Jeff Bucchino, "The Wizard of Draws"

My Turn to Blunder

When playing the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) I like to have a regular routine: I play the gambit, my opponent is surprised or shocked and plays a series of second-best moves, I gain the advantage – and then I either beat my opponent, or benefit from a timely error on his part.

You'll see most of that in the following game – except the part after "I gain the advantage", where I'm the one who comes up with the blunder. How awkward! 

perrypawnpusher - thehunterrjames blitz 10 0, FICS, 2009 

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

Here we go! 4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6

A safe and solid defense. 7.Qd5+ Ke8 8.Qxc5 d6 9.Qe3 Nf6

10.0-0 Kf7 11.f4

A bit better than 11.Nc3 c6 12.f4 Rf8 13.f5 Ne5 14.d4 Nc4 15.Qd3 Nb6 16.Bg5 Kg8 17.g4 Nbd7 18.Rae1 Qb6 19.Na4 Qb4 20.b3 Nxg4 21.Bd2 Qa3 22.Bc3 b5 23.Bb2 Qb4 24.Bc3 Qa3 25.Bb2 Qb4 26.Bc3 Qa3 27.Bb2 draw perrypawnpusher - joejox, blitz, FICS, 2009 11...Re8 12.d3 I thought the right move was to advance the f-pawn, but I couldn't remember (or figure out) why Black couldn't respond with 12...Rxe4. (Answer: White captures the Knight with check, then moves his Queen.) Better was 12.f5 Ne5 13.Nc3 (13.d4 Neg4 14.Qb3+ Kf8 15.h3 Rxe4 16.hxg4 Rxg4 17.Qf3 c6 18.Nc3 d5 19.Bf4 Kg8 20.Be5 h5 21.Rae1 Bd7 22.Re3 Qb6 23.b3 Rf8 24.Na4 Qb4 25.Nc5 Bc8 26.c3 Qb6 27.Bxf6 gxf6 28.Qh3 Rg5 29.Ne6 Bxe6 30.fxe6 Qc7 31.e7 Re8 32.Qe6+ Kh8 33.Qxf6+ Rg7 34.Qf8+ Black resigned Vazquez - Carrington, Mexico, 2nd match, 1876) 13...Nc4 14.Qd4 Ne5 15.d3 Kg8 16.Bg5 h6 17.Bxf6 gxf6 18.Qd5+ Be6 19.fxe6 c6 20.e7+ Kg7 21.exd8Q Raxd8 22.Qd4 c5 23.Qf2 Black resigned perrypawnpusher - DysonLin, blitz, FICS, 2009 12...c5 Two alternatives: 12...Kg8 13.Nd2 Ng4 14.Qe2 Qh4 15.Nf3 Qh5 16.h3 Nf6 17.Bd2 Bxh3 18.gxh3 Qxh3 19.Rf2 Ng4 20.Rg2 h5 21.Ng5 Qh4 22.Rf1 Nxf4 23.Bxf4 Rf8 24.Ne6 Rf7 25.Bg5 Rxf1+ 26.Kxf1 Qh1+ 27.Rg1 Qh3+ 28.Ke1 Nh2 29.Qg2 Nf3+ 30.Kd1 Nxg1 31.Qxg1 Qxe6 32.Kd2 Rf8 33.Be3 Qg4 34.Qe1 h4 35.Kc3 h3 36.Kb3 Qg2 37.Qc3 h2 38.Qxc7 h1Q 39.Qxd6 Qh5 40.Qe6+ Kh8 White resigned guest435 - guest1150, Internet Chess Club, 2002; 12...Ng4 13.Qe2 Qh4 14.h3 Nf6 15.Qf3 Kg8 16.Nc3 Nh5 17.Nd5 Rf8 18.g4 Ne5 19.Qg2 c6 20.Ne7+ Qxe7 21.gxh5 Qh4 22.fxe5 Bxh3 23.Rxf8+ Rxf8 24.Bg5 Qxh5 25.Qg3 Rf3 26.Qh4 Qxh4 27.Bxh4 dxe5 28.Kh2 Be6 29.Bg3 h5 30.Kg2 Rf6 31.Bxe5 Rg6+ 32.Kh2 Rg5 33.Bc3 Bg4 34.Rg1 Kf7 35.Rf1+ Ke6 36.Rf8 Bd1 37.Rf2 g6 38.Rd2 Bg4 39.Rg2 b5 40.Kg1 c5 41.Bd2 Re5 42.Bf4 Bf3 43.Rf2 Black resigned guest2660 - guest2731, Internet Chess Club, 2004 13.Nc3 Ng4 14.Qg3 h5 A strange echo of my second game against TJPOT. 15.f5 N6e5 16.h3 Nf6 17.Bf4 This is the wrong idea: the Bishop should pin at g5 and then the Knight should go to d5. 17...b5 18.Bxe5 I should have admitted my mistake and played 18.Bg5. (I almost did.) 18...Rxe5 19.Qg6+ 19...Kf8 20.g4 hxg4 21.hxg4 Nxg4

Okay, Black obliges me by giving back a piece, and I will have the advantage. 22.Qxg4 Qf6 23.Nd5 Qh6 24.f6 Simply losing the Queen. Unbelieveable. No excuse.

Was it too hard to find 24.Rf3? 24...Bxg4 25.fxg7+ Rybka 3 later said this led to a mate in 19. I'd had enough and resigned here.

de.wikibooks

When slightly-interested people write about the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) they are usually content to present the historic game Amateur - Blackburne, London, 1885 – usually with light, often outdated, notes.

I recently saw coverage in a German language wikibook that presented the game with a little bit more attention.

3. Miniatur
Gespielt in London 1880.
4.Lc4xf7+? (Dies ist das Jerome-Gambit, das durch 7. ... Dd8-e7 8. De5xh8 De7xe4+ 9. Ke1-d1 De4xg2 10. Dh8xh7+ Kf7-f8 11. Th1-e1 d5 12. Te1-e8+ Kf8xe8 13. Dh7xg8+ Lc5-f8 widerlegt wird) Ke8xf7 5.Sf3xe5+ Sc6xe5 6.Dd1-h5+ g7-g6 7.Dh5xe5 d7-d6 Dieser letzte schwarze Zug eröffnet eine Falle. 8.De5xh8 Dd8-h4 9.0-0 Sg8-f6 Und die Falle hat zugeschnappt. 10.c2-c3? (10. Da8-d8 hält das Gleichgewicht) Sf6-g4 11.h2-h3 Lc5xf2+ 12.Kg1-h1 Lc8-f5!
13.Dh8xa8 Dh4xh3+! 14.g2xh3 Lf5xe4#

The author not only points out White's better alternative, 10.Qd8, he indicates that the game is then in balance – most sources unaware of the analysis of Chandler and Dimitrov say that White has the advantage.

Also, it is heartening to see Whistler's Defense, 7. ... Dd8-e7, given as the refutation to the Jerome Gambit. The wikibook author sees Blackburne's 7...d6 as setting a trap – which snaps shut on White after 9...Nf6.

Jerome - A/Z

It's always fun to find a new Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) game, especially one played by its originator, Alonozo Wheeler Jerome.

The other day I thought I had made a discovery, but it turned out that Jerome's game vs Mr. Z was already in my database, as a game vs Mr. A(mateur).

Jerome - Zimmerman, correspondence, 1880
St. Louis Daily Globe-Democrat, April 18, 1880: We are indebted to Mr. A. W. Jerome for the subjoined game, played by letter with Mr. J. K. Zimmerman.

Pittsburgh Telegraph, February 2, 1881: The following game played betwen the author of the "Jerome Gambit" and another amateur.

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

Pittsburgh Telegraph: This move constitutes the gambit, and although unsound, as shown by Mr. Charles's analysis in this column, yet leads to some interesting and critical positions.

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 d6

This is a line popular with computers, and is the refutation International Master Gary Lane suggests in his The Greatest Ever Chess Tricks and Traps.

It figured in six of Jerome's games against S. A. Charles in their unfinished 1881 correspondence match.

It was first seen in D'Aumiller - A.P., 1878

8.f5+

Rejecting the offer of a piece. 8...Qh3+ was seen in one of the Jerome - Charles, correspondence 1881 games.
8...Ke7
The alternative 8...Kd7 was seen in one of the Jerome - Charles games.

9.Nc3 Nf6 10.Qh4 c6 11.d3 Qe8 12.Bg5 b5
St. Louis Daily Globe-Democrat: Black could now get his King into safe quarters by going to Q2, QB2, etc., but as Mr. Jerome justly remarks "While playing part of this game Mr. Zimmerman was chasing Utes and trying to keep warm with the mercury at 20 degrees below zero on the 'tented field' in Colorado; some allowances must therefore be made for failure to make the best moves." - Turf
13.0-0-0 h5
This move is hard to fathom. Either here or on the next move ...b4 seems best.

14.d4 Bxd4 15.Rxd4 c5 16.Bxf6+ gxf6 17.Nd5+
White is developing a bit of initiative, which Black should blunt with either 17...Nf7 or 17...Qf7, when it is unclear how White can reach an advantage.
17...Kf7 18.Qxf6+ Kg8 19.Ne7+ Kh7 20.Rxd6 Ng4 21.Qg5 Black resigns

A Jerome Endgame

From the St. Louis Globe-Democrat, Sunday June 18, 1876

End Game No. 4

White - K at KKt6, Kt at KB6, P at KR6 and P at QR3
Black - K at KR, P at QB6, P at QB5 and P at QR3

The above position, which we take from the "Dubuque," is from actual play; A.W. Jerome (white) versus Mr. Steele (black). White had the move, and was about to resign; he played instead and won.

We invite the close attention of solvers to this ending, and hope to receive solutions, though we don't expect many.

Playing At Odds

Although I always play the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) for fun, sometimes I use the opening as a way of giving "odds" to a lower-rated player. Little did I realize that this strategy was over 150 years old!

The following excerpt should be of historical interest to those who play the Chicago Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nxe5) – see The Myers Opening Bulletin, New MOB No. 4, October - December, 1993 – as it is over 25 years earlier than examples generally known.

From the "Chess" column in Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper, July 12, 1856

We give place to the following communication from Mr. D.W. Fiske, of the Astor Library, inasmuch as it may interest those who are in the habit of giving odds. For our single self, we can only say that we do not delight in any games at odds, and – while we admit the necessity of thus equalizing the game by removing the disparity in force between different players – we never like to encounter "rook" or "pawn and two" men, when we can find an antagonist of the first rank. The toughest match we ever played was with our friend Hamilton, of St. Louis, giving the queen's knight and receiving the pawn and move in return. To those, however, who practice playing at odds, the suggestion of our young friend "Shabiludius" will prove curious and instructive.

SOMETHING NEW IN CHESS

I have been playing latterly some games at a new and curious kind of odds, namely: The odds of giving the Knight in the King's Knight's opening for the King's Pawn. Although my experience in giving these odds has been too brief to enable me to determine their precise value, yet I should hardly be surprised if, upon analysis, they should prove to be little greater than the odds of giving pawn and move – at least I have tried them successfully with players to whom I could only afford to give pawn and move. The following are the opening moves:
WHITE_____________ BLACK
1 P to K 4___________ 1 P to K4
2 Kt to KB3__________2 Kt to QB3
3 Kt takes KP ________3 Kt takes Kt
4 P to Q4
and Black must withdraw his Knight either to King's Knight's third or to Queen's Bishop third. In the former case, White appears to embarass Black's game materially by playing Pawn to King's Bishop's fourth. If he place his Knight at Queen's Bishop's third, perhaps White's best move is Pawn to Queen's fifth, compelling black either to carry his Knight home or to place it on the Queen's Rook's fourth.

CARRERA, who enumerates many curious methods of giving odds, does not, if my memory serves me right, even hint at this. PHILIDOR has left us some games in which he gave the Knight for the Pawn and move, but in that case the Queen's Knight was given by one party and the King's Bishop's Pawn by the other. I have been persuaded to communicate this very brief notice of these novel odds to the ILLUSTRATED NEWSPAPER, in the hope that, if they are of no value, some chess analyst will at once demonstrate their unworthiness. But I also hope that, should they be found to contain any elements of interest, they may be added to the list of the many beautiful and ingenious contrivances by which the devotees of Caissa seek to equalize their disparity at chess skill.
Shabiludius