Jerome Gambit Blog: Still More Tidying Up

Time to review, update, and clarify a few more things in this Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 Bxf7+) blog. For earlier efforts, see "Jerome Gambit Blog: Tidying Up" and "Jerome Gambit Blog: More Tidying Up"

First on my mind is a quote from the second " Tidying Up"

By the way, as for the Kaissiber saga, see

"To Infinity... And Beyond! (Part II)", "Breaking News..." and "Jerome Gambit Blog: Tidying Up ". I'm still hopeful.

I'm not hopeful any more. It's unlikely that my history of the Jerome Gambit will appear in the pages of Stefan Bücker's amazing chess magazine, Kaissiber. While the audacity of such an opening appealed to the editor, the story of Alonzo Wheeler Jerome's creation is a history of questionable analysis and even more questionable play. Although Kaissiber does not shy away from creative chess notions, its focus on an accurate assessment of things would require massive corrections and/or footnoting – to start.

For more about the Jerome Gambit game Harris,W.A. Sgt. - Quayle,Ernest H.Los Angeles, California, USA 1944, as given in "The Joy of Discovery" Parts I, II, and III, there was a little update in "I love a great used book store". And then the trail went cold, again. (On another hunt, "History Mystery" was fun, though; and I look forward to more discoveries about A F Reed, as first set forth in "A Small Clue to Follow..." and "The Game is Afoot!" )


Unusual as it's supposed to be, the Wikipedia article on the Jerome Gambit continues to contain its link to this blog (see "Hey Wiki, it's me, Ricky!").


While the following remains accurate:

"Is it September already

" requires a number of updates. To date there has been no Jerome Gambit tournament in Jerome, Arizona, as far as I know. I still have an observer near the scene, though I'll have my say about it. One of the main figures in the possible Jerome, Arizona "Jerome Gambit Tournament" is the creator of "The Jerome Gambit is Viable - NOT!" video, which I recomment. (Too, my son Matt, of "Driving Distance" has permanently relocated to Scottsdale, Arizona, and will be able to drive up and keep an eye on anything that might occur.)


An update to "The Jerome Gambit Gemeinde (modern)" would have to include chessfriend Geoff Chandler (of Chandler Cornered) whose contributions here (see "Queened! and Rooked!" "Whodunnit??" and "Blunder Table" ) have been hilarious.

I would also like to add the name of Dr. Paulsen

In light of this it certainly seems reasonable (at least until historical precedents are uncovered) to give 5...Ke7 the title of "Paulsen variation" and award the good doctor (PhD) membership in the Jerome Gambit Gemeinde (see "The Jerome Gambit Gemeinde (early)" and "The Jerome Gambit Gemeinde (modern)") – even though there is one earlier example of the line in my database (presented in an earlier post, as well: see "An Odd Line in an Odd Line")."Jerome Gambit, Paulsen Variation"

and that of Francesco Recchia, who contributed the very forward-looking "A Kind of Jerome Gambit that Wins".


The possible connection betwen Winston Churchill and Alonzo Wheeler Jerome (see "From the Email Bag...") has been traced a bit further, to the U.S. northeast; but has not yet been tied together..


Connections betwen IM Gary Lane and the Jerome Gambit continue. Not only is it true that "A check of the Everyman Chess website shows that Gary Lane's The Greatest Ever Chess Tricks and Traps is available" further information exists in "Firsts" and "An International Master Refutes the Jerome Gambit".

The "Jerome Gambit and the Perfesser series" Part I, Part II, Part III and PartIV, was, of course, followed by another instructive, exploratory "human vs computers" match involving, "RevvedUp" and a handful of silicon monsters, starting with "Jerome Gambit: Drilling Down (1)"

"Doesn't anybody read this blog?", regarding perrypawnpusher - Sgrunterundt, blitz 2 18, FICS, 2008 was a needless lament, being followed by a host of responses: "Back at me", "Hoist by my own petard...", "Where are all these Jeromes coming from?", "Perhaps not every opening should be Jerome-ized...", "Be careful what you wish for...", "If I write all this, and someone reads it...", and "I don't have time for this stuff..."

Readers who were interested in "Hip' Kat" should check out a couple of other hippo sources: hippo_chess@abv.bg and hippo_chess@abv.bg.


Another Pandora's box was opened with "London Calling...Seven Months of Blog"

I also got wondering the other day: is there another totally obscure and disreputable tactical opening line or gambit that I could go digging for information about, while I'm researching the Jerome Gambit??

from which came forth "The next best thing...", "The next worse thing...", "Worth a Second Look (Part 1)", "Worth a Second Look (Part 2)", "Worth a Second Look (Part 3)", "Wild!", "Wilder!", "Wildest!", "And Yet Wilder Still...", "More of The Next Best Thing...", "Busch-Gass Gambit" and "Obscure and Disreputable Enough?"


Alas, I have not yet uncovered "The rest of the story...?" concerning the game Wall - Guest4395, Microsoft Internet Gaming Zone, 2001.


For that matter, in "The Westminster Papers" the refererence to the chess player "H.W.P" of Vermont is also still a mystery to me.

Further chapters of "Jerome Gambit for Dummies (1)" "(2)" "(3)" are being prepared.

I have switched from one version of "Chess Publisher" to another to present the games in posts. The earlier one is responsible for the annoying account messages.

What does it profit a man...?

From An Invitation to Chess A Picture Guide to the Royal Game, Irving Chernev and Kenneth Harkness, New York, Simon and Schuster (1945) (descriptive notation changed to algebraic notation)

Mistakes in the Opening

Much can be learned from a clear understanding of the things one should NOT do. Therefore, let us examine some of the common mistakes made in the opening and demonstrate how and why they lose.

We are not referring now to blunders which cost material or expose you to checkmate. At all stages of the game you must anticipate and answer your opponent's material-winning or mating thrests.

The mistakes we are now considering are strategical errors. They can be defined in one sentence: Any opening moves which give your opponent an opportunity to gain an advantage in development are strategical mistakes. Specifically, mistakes of this nature may be classified as follows: Premature attacks: Some players are too aggressive for their own good. They start out with the idea of annihilating their opponents in the first ten moves.

If an attack is pursued with good developing moves, there can be no criticism of such tactics. Too often, however, these early attacks are made at the expense of development. Premature attacks with two or three pieces are doomed against good defense. The opponent can defend with developing moves and gain an advantage in mobilization which will enable him to counter-attack successfully...

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5

White has played

4.Bxf7+

Without waiting to complete his development he begins an entirely unsound attck. Black has played his defense well and there is no justification for making an attack of this nature. White has sacrificed a piece and to justify this there must be a forced continuation which wins material or checkmates.

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+

Black has captured the Bishop with his King and White has played Nxe5. This is the second move in White's unsound "combination." Now he is sacrificing his Knight for a Pawn. Note that Black was not afraid to accept the original Bishop sacrifice. Always accept sacrifices if you see no reason for not doing so.

5...Nxe5 6.Qh5+

Black has captured ...Nxe5 and White has played 6.Q-R5ch. Now we see the "idea" behind White's attack. He has given up two pieces for two Pawns, but now he must win back one piece. However, this is not sufficient. Black can now play ...Ng6, allowing White to capture Qxc5, and Black will be ahead in material with a winning game.

6...g6

But instead of ...Ng6, Black has played ...g6 to get out of check. White has continued

7.Qxe5

Now the Queen is attacking Black's Bishop and Rook simultaneously. One of these pieces must be lost. Has Black blundered? Has he overlooked this? No, he is deliberately tempting White, leading him on to his destruction.

7...d6

Black has played ...d6, protecting the attacked Bishop with a Pawn and releasing his other Bishop. White has played

8.Qxh8

Now count the material and note that White's premature attack has apparently succeeded. He has gained two Pawns and won the exchange (Rook for minor piece).

Why did Black allow this? What is his plan?

8.Qxh8 Qh4

Black has played ...Qh4 and now we see why he allowed White to capture his Rook. White's Queen has been deflected from the scene of forthcoming action. His premature attack has left his home front undeveloped and undefended. Black is now launching his counter-attack. He is threatening to play ...Qxf2+, followed by ...Bg4 mate!

9.0-0 Nf6

To defend this threat, White has castled (9 0-0). Black has played ...Nf6, thereby developing a piece and at the same time closing the lid on White's Queen which now cannot retreat to aid in the defense of the home front. Note that Black has a Queen, Bishop and Knight in active play and that his other Bishop is free to jump into action.

10.c3

White has no pieces in action and his King is inadequately defended. He has played 10.c3, trying to shut off Black's Bishop with d4.

10...Ng4

Black has played ...Ng4 ,threatening ...Qxh2 mate. (The N move leads to a pleasing finish but Black could have won with [ 10...Bh3 11.Qxa8 ( if 11.gxh3 Rxh8) 11...Qg4 12.g3 Qf3 and mate next move]

11.h3 Bxf2+

White has played his only defense to the threatened mate, 11.h3, and Black has forced the issue with ...Bxf2+. The White King is in a "mating net," as it is called, and canot escape. If White now plays Rxf2, Black will recapture ...Qxf2ch. The White King must then move to h1 (h2 is attacked by the N) and Black mates with ...Qf1.

12.Kh1 Bf5

White has played 12.Kh1, his only move, and black has played ...Bf5, bringing out another piece. Note that this piece can be put "en prise" to a Pawn because the Black Rook now attacks the White Queen. Note also that the Queen cannot escape from the Rook's attack. Every square on the diagonal is attacked by a Black piece.

13.Qxa8 Qxh3+

White was forced to play 13.Qxa8 or lose his Queen.

Black has played Qh3+! Black is sacrificing his Queen and demonstrating the helplessness of White's position. White's QR, QKt and QB cannot aid him now because they were never developed. His adventurous Queen is far away - and quite useless.

14.gxh3 Bxe4#

White has played 14.gxh3, his only means of getting out of check, and Black has delivered the final thrust with ...Bxe4 mate. A delightful, "pure" mate with two Bishops and a Knight. Moral: What is a man profited if he gains a Queen and two Rooks and loses by checkmate?

Premature attacks don't pay.

Obscure and Disreputable Enough?

Although this blog is mostly about the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) it sometimes wanders a bit further afield.

For example, a while back, in the post "London Calling...Seven Months of Blog", I mused

I also got wondering the other day: is there another totally obscure and disreputable tactical opening line or gambit that I could go digging for information about, while I'm researching the Jerome Gambit??

This exercise led to a whole slew of new posts and opening ideas: "The next best thing...", "The next worse thing...", "Worth a Second Look (Part 1)", "Worth a Second Look (Part 2)", "Worth a Second Look (Part 3)", "Wild!", "Wilder!", "Wildest!", "And Yet Wilder Still...", "More of The Next Best Thing..." and "Busch-Gass Gambit".

I was reading Bob Long's new Chess DVD catalog the other day, and noticed that Volume 2 of his "The Busy Man's Chess Openings" series by IM Andrew Martin is coming out. Sub-titled "Black Shockers" it focuses on winning from the Black side, and includes analysis of the following defense: 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c5.

The line is as old as Greco, and seen today about as often as the Yeti, but in the past it was tried by Marshall, Schlechter, Rubinstein, Grunfeld, Euwe and Heidenfeld. O'Kelley de Galway, Bisguier and Westerinen played it a number of times. There's even an online Opening Report on it.

Might be worth checking out, at that.

A Side Line to Watch

When my opponent unleashed his 7th move in our Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) game, the only surprise came later, when I realized that it was the first time the move had been played against me.

It's a side line that all who play the Jerome should be ready for.


perrypawnpusher - ScudRocket
blitz 2 11, FICS, 2009
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 Bxf2+

National Master Brian Wall discussed this kind of move, when made by a lower-rated player, in one of his games. I figured my opponent (my strength) was thinking

Only a patzer would try an attack like this! I can disrupt his crazy attack, swap Queens, and then easily wallop someone I could probably give a knight to, not just a pawn...

8.Kxf2 Qf6+

Alternately: 8...Qh4+ 9.g3 Qh6 10.Qxh8 Qg5 11.Qxh7+ Ke6 12.Qxg8+ Ke5 13.d4+ Kxe4 14.Re1+ Qe3+ 15.Rxe3+ Kxd4 16.c3+ Kc5 17.Qxg6 d6 18.Qe8 a5 19.b4+ axb4 20.cxb4+ Kxb4 21.Re4+ Kc5 22.Be3+ Kd5 23.Nc3# checkmate, annicks - Ribosome, Dos Hermanas Internet, 2002;
8...Nf6 9.d3 (9.Qf4 g5 10.Qf3 g4 11.Qf4 d5 12.e5 Rf8 13.exf6 Kg6 14.Ke1 Qxf6 15.Qxf6+ Rxf6 16.d3 Bd7 17.Nc3 Re8+ 18.Kd1 d4 19.Ne4 Rf5 20.h3 gxh3 21.Rxh3 Rf1+ 22.Ke2 Bxh3 23.Kxf1 Bf5 24.Ng5 c5 25.b3 Black resigned, instantcrow - KingEfraim, ChessWorld.net 2005) 9...Re8 10.Qf4 d6 11.Rf1 Kg7 12.Qh6+ Kg8 13.h3 Bd7 14.Bg5 Re5 15.Kg1 Ng4 16.Bxd8 Nxh6 17.Bxc7 Rc8 18.Bxd6 Rg5 19.Bf4 Rgc5 20.Bxh6 Rxc2 21.Nc3 Black resigned, guest232 - BoardChairman, Internet Chess Club 2002

9.Qxf6+ Nxf6 10.d3
Or: 10.Nc3 b6 11.d3 d6 12.Rf1 Rf8 13.Kg1 Kg7 14.Bg5 Nd7 15.Nd5 Rxf1+ 16.Rxf1 c6 17.Nc7 Rb8 18.Ne6+ Kg8 19.Bh6 Ba6 20.Kf2 Nc5 21.Nxc5 bxc5 22.Ke3 Re8 23.b3 d5 24.Rf4 Bc8 25.Kd2 dxe4 26.Rxe4 Rxe4 27.dxe4 Kf7 28.h3 Kf6 29.Ke3 g5 30.g4 Kg6 31.Bf8 h5 32.Bxc5 a6 Black resigned, blackburne - Bullit52, Chessworld.net 2007.

White is up a solid pawn – and remember, a few moves ago, he was down two pieces.

10...d6

10...d5 11.exd5 Nxd5 12.Rf1 Ke8 13.Bh6 Nf6 14.Bg7 Ng4+ 15.Kg1 Rg8 16.Re1+ Kf7 17.Bd4 Rd8 18.Rf1+ Bf5 19.h3 Rxd4 20.hxg4 Rxg4 21.Nc3 c6 22.Rae1 b5 23.Ne4 Kg7 24.Nd6 Rg5 25.Nxf5+ gxf5 26.Re6 Rg6 27.Re5 Rf8 28.Re7+ Kh8 29.Rxa7 f4 30.Rf3 h5 31.Re7 Rfg8 32.Re2 Rg4 33.Kh2 R8g5 34.c4 Kg7 35.b3 Kf6 36.Re4 Rxg2+ 37.Kh3 R2g3+ 38.Rxg3 Rxg3+ 39.Kh2 Rxd3 40.Rxf4+ Kg5 41.Rf2 Kg4 42.Rg2+ Kf4 43.cxb5 cxb5 44.Kg1 b4 45.Rf2+ Rf3 46.Kg2 Rxf2+ 47.Kxf2 Ke4 48.Ke2 Kd4 49.Kd2 h4 50.Ke2 Kc3 White resigned, mediax - Carlos Azcarate, ChessWorld.net, 2008

11.Rf1 Kg7 12.Bg5

This is still known territory: 12.Kg1 Bd7 13.Nc3 c6 (13...Rhf8 14.h3 (14.Bg5 Nh5 15.Nd5 Rac8 16.Rxf8 Kxf8 17.Rf1+ Kg7 18.Bf6+ Nxf6 19.Nxf6 Bc6 20.Ng4 h5 21.Ne3 Re8 22.Rf4 d5 23.Nxd5 Black resigned, blackburne03 - bobby-pisher, Internet Chess Club, 2003) 14...Nh5 15.Be3 a6 16.Nd5 c6 17.Nb6 Rxf1+ 18.Rxf1 Rd8 19.Bg5 Black resigned, Moller - Pedersen, www.eskak.dk 2008) 14.Bh6+ Kxh6 15.Rxf6 Rhf8 16.Raf1 Rxf6 17.Rxf6 d5 18.Rd6 Black forfeited, guest1824 - guest1255, Internet Chess Club, 2002

12...Ng4+ 13.Kg1 Be6

Both Kings have castled-by-hand, and Black is slightly ahead in development – but not a pawn's worth. Maybe he planned to out-play me here, but it didn't work out that way.

14.h3 Nf6



A mistake: 14...h6 was necessary.
15.Bxf6+ Kh6 16.Bxh8 Rxh8

A Rook is a Rook.

17.Nc3 Rg8 18.Rf6 Bd7 19.Rf7 Rd8 20.Raf1 g5 21.R1f6+ Kh5 22.g4+
I had mate worked out, but 22.Rxh7# was faster.
22...Kh4 23.Rxh7+ Kg3 24.Ne2 checkmate

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.