One More Bit of Advice...

If you are going to be playing or facing the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) or one of its cousins, probably the best piece of advice I can offer – to avoid untold heartbreak – is the standard offering from every teacher: Pay Attention! Witness the following short games from my database...

AlgozBR - AbdiAshirta

blitz FICS, 2009 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qxh8 Nf6?? 9.Qxd8 1-0

AlgozBR - Coxybleue

blitz FICS, 2009 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Ke8 6.Qh5+ Ke7 [ 6...g6 7.Nxg6 hxg6 8.Qxg6+ Ke7=/+] 7.Qf7+ Kd6 8.Nc4+ Kc6 [ 8...Kc5 9.Qd5+ Kb4 10.a3+ Ka4 11.Nc3#] 9.Qd5#

AlgozBR - nikolasa

blitz FICS, 2009 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.d4 Bxd4 7.Qxd4 Qf6 8.Qc4+?? Nxc4 0-1

CesarDK - moadib

blitz FICS, 2009 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Na5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Ke7 6.Qh5 Nh6 7.d4 d6 8.Bg5+ Ke6 9.Bxd8 1-0

UNPREDICTABLE - DAVIDSTEINFELD

blitz FICS, 2009 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 7.Qxc5 Qe7 8.d3?? Qxc5 0-1

UNPREDICTABLE - ViveLaVie

blitz FICS, 2009 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 7.Qxc5 Qe7 8.d3?? Qxc5 White resigns 0-1

UNPREDICTABLE - papin (1361)

blitz FICS, 2009 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qxh8 Nf6?? 9.Qxd8 Ng8 1-0

itajuba - barcellos

blitz FICS, 2009 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.c3 Nf6 6.b4 Bb6 7.Qb3+ Kf8 8.Ng5 Ng4?? 9.Qf7#

richiehill - PlatinumKnight

blitz FICS, 2009 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Ke6 6.Nc4 Qg5 7.0-0 Bd6 8.d3 Ne7?? 9.Bxg5 1-0

yorgos - MichaelOlsson

blitz FICS, 2009 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ Kxf7 6.Ng5+ Kg8 7.Qe2 h6 8.Qc4+ Kf8?? [ 8...d5 9.exd5 b5 10.Qxc5 Nd4-/+] 9.Qf7#

An Early Lewis Gambit

As a follow-up to yesterday's post on the Lewis Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.d4) (see "S.O.S.") I thought I'd pass along another early game, along with the same advice that I've given to those who defend against the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+): If someone offers you a Bishop, Take it!

De Con - Amateur
correspondence, 1913

1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 4...Kf8


It's not clear what Black gains by declining. Perhaps he is just trying to be difficult.

5.Bb3 Nf6

Hebert - Dumesnil, Masters - Juniors, 1997 continued 5...Qe7 6.Ne2 Qxe4 7.0-0 Nc6 8.Nd2 Qg4 9.h3 Qh5 10.Nf3 Ne5 11.Nxe5 Qxe5 12.Bf4 Qf6 13.Bxc7 d6 14.c3 d3 15.Qxd3 Ne7 16.Rad1 Bf5 17.Qg3 Nc8 18.Bd5 a5 19.Bxb7 Ra7 20.Bxc8 Rxc7 21.Bxf5 Qxf5 22.Nd4 Qf6 23.Rfe1 Re7 24.Rxe7 Qxe7 25.Qf3+ Qf7 26.Qa8+ Qe8 27.Qxa5 g6 28.Qc7 Qe7 29.Qc8+ Kg7 30.Ne6+ Kf6 31.Qxh8+ Black resigned


6.e5 Qe7 7.Qe2 Ne8



8.Nf3 d6


The kind of error that a Jerome Gambit player can appreciate.


9.Bg5 Qd7 10.e6 Qc6 11.e7 checkmate


graphic by Jeff Bucchino, The Wizard of Draws

S.O.S.

It was fun to see that one of the articles in S.O.S. #10 – Secrets of Opening Surprises, Volume 10 – by Jeroen Bosch, was on the Lewis Gambit: 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.d4. It is an old line (the earliest examples I have are from an 1841 Staunton - Cochrane match) and, of course, a piece of it is reminiscent of the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+).

While the critical response for Black has to be 3...Bxd4 (Bosch recommends 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.0-0 with compensation) after 3...exd4, the recommendation – by the author (and Rybka 3, for that matter) is 4.Bxf7+.

We've seen this before, in the blindfold game Blackburne -Evelyn, London 1862 (1-0, 32), starting out 1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.Bc4 Bc5.

After 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.d4 exd4 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Qh5+ g6 6.Qxc5 Nc6 Bosch sees

...an interesting position. The material is equal, White's queen has been developed rather early and black's king is not entirely safe. Play could continue 7.Nf3 (7.Ne2). Well, at least this is a fun position to play.

Bosch's ultimate assessment is

Black certainly has chances to equalize after 3..exd4, but there are more than enough practical chances for white, and this is clearly not the refuataion of 3.d4

Poisoned by the Jerome Gambit

When I play a chess game with the White pieces, I don't always reach a Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+), but I am happy if some of those times I can reach the Boden-Kieseritzky Gambit (see"If not a Jerome Gambit..." and "Jerome Gambit... Jerome Gambit... Jerome Gambit...") which I am trying to learn. Sometimes, however, ideas from the Jerome spill over into my thoughts about the Boden-Kieseritzky, and that can lead to a severe case of brain poisoning... 

 perrypawnpusher - anonymous 

blitz, FICS, 2009 

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 Oh, well. No Jerome. We'll try for a B-K.

4.0-0 Nxe4 5.Nc3 Nxc3 6.dxc3 d6

This is not the best defense for Black. Pity I couldn't remember the right response...

7.Re1

White gets the advantage, instead, with 7.Ng5 Be6 8.Nxe6 fxe6 9.Bxe6.

7...Bg4

8.Bxf7+

Hey, it works in the Jerome, right? No need to think it through, right? Wrong.

It's embarassing to have missed the correct execution of the underlying idea: 8.Nxe5 dxe5 (8...Bxd1? 9.Bxf7+ Ke7 10.Bg5 mate) 9.Qxg4 with advantage.

8...Kxf7 9.Ng5+

9...Ke7

Yeow! Instead, Black had 9...Qxg5 (so much for the "protection" of the Bishop), coming out a piece ahead after 10.Bxg5 Bxd1 11.Raxd1.

In truth, after 

10.Qxg4 I went on to win the game in 30 more moves, but it was a lesson learned – I hope. And I still need to brush up on my Boden-Kieseritzky.

The D-word

Members of the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) Gemeinde do not play their opening "with a draw in hand," but to win madly, or expire trying. Still, there can come a time when the wisest course just might be to split the point, and leave conquest for the next encounter... The following game is a lot of fun to play over, from start to finish (use the chess publisher application at the end of this post, if you wish), but I want to focus on some positions in the middle game, where choosing "the better part of valor" might have a good choice for White. 

 

TWODOGS - Haroldlee123 JGTourney4 ChessWorld, 2009

Here we have a "typical" Jerome Gambit middlegame: a real mess. Black-to-move has a choice of two captures, one which will leave him a piece ahead and one which (apparently) will leave him a Rook ahead. A simple choice? Nothing is simple in the Jerome Gambit! 16...Bxe1 The wrong choice.

White's opening 4.Bxf7+ and Black's superfluous ...h6 and later exchange of his light-squared Bishop left some clear light-squared weaknesses around his King.

White now has 17.Qf5+ and after 17...Kg8 18.Qe6+ he can produce a draw by repetition. If Black should try 17...Ke8 instead, then 18.Qg6+ either again leads to a draw by repetition – or a calamity for Black.

This can be seen after 17.Qf5+ Ke7, when 18.Rxe1 leads either to checkmate or a pile of material after 18...Ne5 19.Nc5 Kd6 20.Nxb7+, etc. Any member of the Gemeinde would be proud of such a "swindle." Of course, after the correct 16...dxd4 17.Rxe4 White will have to keep up the pressure and look elsewhere for his salvation. 17.Rxe1 Nb4

A perplexing move, not only allowing 18.Qf5+ drawing as above, but also allowing the flashy 18.Bd6+ which also draws. White's response in the game, however, allows the routine capture of his Knight, and the magic is again gone. 18.Qg6 dxe4 The light-square weaknesses are still around the Black King, but White no longer has his Knight to keep check-blockers off of f6. 19.Rxe4 Nxc2 Well, yes, this was Black's idea, although there was certainly nothing wrong with 19...Nc6. However, now White has 20.Be5 when 20...Qe7 21.Rf4 Kg8 22.Bxg7 Qxg7 again allows White to repeat positions with 23.Qe6+ Kh7 24.Qe5+ for the draw. Black can try the alternative, 20...Qg5 but after 21.Qe6 White has the better game. 20.Qf5+ Right idea, wrong time. 20...Kg8 Instead of interposing the Queen with 20...Qf6, allowing 21.Qc5+ and 22.Qxc2, reducing his advantage, Black again allows the light-square repetitions and the draw: 21.Qe6+ Kh7 22.Qf5+ Kg8 23.Qe6+ etc. White, in turn, chooses to fight on – from a worse position. 21.Be5 d3 Black's advancing pawn will soon star in a whole collection of dramas itself, but for now the second player needed to first defend with 21...Qf8. 22.Bxg7 White is beginning to grasp the situation. The text move, indeed, allows a draw after 22...Qg5 23.Qe6+ Kxg7 24.h4 Qc1+ 25.Kh2 Rhg8 26.Rg4+ etc. However, White had more in the position: 22.Qe6+ Kh7 23.Rg4 Qf8 24.Qg6+ Kg8 25.Bxg7 Qf7 26.Qxd3. Black is temporarily a Rook up, but he will shortly need to surrender his Queen. 22...d2 This move should seriously scare White into going for a draw. For a moment, it looks like it does.

23.Qe6+

Okay: Now, after 23...Kxg7 24.Rg4+ Qg5 25.Qd7+ Kf6 26.Rxg5+ hxg5 27.Qxd2 White will have a Queen and a pawn to balance out Black's two Rooks. A complicated, but roughly even, game.

Instead, Black distrusts the passive Bishop sacrifice, and immediately falls into a doomed situation.

23...Kh7 24.Qxh6+ Kg8 25.Qxh8+ There is no need for 25.Qe6+ now. 25...Kf7 26.Rf4+ 26...Ke6 27.Qh6+ Kd7 Now 28.Qh5, guarding against the passed pawn Queening (if 28...Kc8, 29.Rf8) and preparing to finish up the King, looks like the proper reward for White's fighting spirit. Unfortunately, he has a worried eye on Black's passer, and decides that "more checks to the King" is the answer. It is not – but the excitement is hardly over.

28.Rf7+ Kc8 Black can afford to allow his Queen to be pinned to his King: he plans on getting another one. 29.Qe6+ Kb8 30.Kh2 d1Q Black has travelled far from his "doomed situation" mentioned in the note to White's 23rd move. He figures from here on out, it's just a matter of technique.

It is – but it has to be proper technique.

31.Rf8 a6 What was called for was something that ends the clutter, something like 31...Qxf8 32.Bxf8 Qd8. Black's move, however, lets loose the chaos again. White now has the remarkable 32.Qe7, after which, despite being a Queen down, he can enforce the draw, obtain a better position, or checkmate Black: 32...Ka7 ( 32...Qc8 33.Rxc8+ Kxc8 34.Qf8+ Qd8 35.Qf5+ Qd7 ( 35...Kb8 36.Qxc2 +-) 36.Qf8+ Qd8 37.Qf5+ draw) 33.Qc5+ b6 34.Rxd8 Rxd8 35.Qxc7+ Ka8 36.Qc6+ Ka7 37.Qc7+ draw Amazing! 32.Rxd8+ Aquiescing to the loss. Well, not exactly: White still has a handful of "Jerome pawns" and decides to put them to use. Still, thirty moves later White resigned.

Is there any wonder why the Jerome Gambit still fascinates me??

Debut Vazquez

Here are two selections from the British Chess Magazine, from the January and February 1892 issues, concerning Andres Clemente Vazquez, an early member of the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) Gemeinde, recently spotlighted on this blog for his 1891 match with J.H. Blackburne (see "Alas, it was not meant to be").

Senor A.C. Vazquez, in La Strategie, says that after ten or fifteen years of conceding odds in Mexico, he as acquired some practice of the game. Experience has showed him the necessity of avoiding the exchanging of pieces from the commencement of the game, until, in short, the inferior player commits himself. The following variation, he believes, fills the bill. With it he has accomplished excellent results in Havana. It was designated by the late Captain Mackenzie, a "Terrible Opening."

(Remove White's Queen Knight)
1.c3 e5
2.Qc2 d5
3.d3 Nf6
4.Bd2 c5
5.0-0-0 Qa5
6.Kb1 Nc6
7.h3 Be6
8.e3 Be7
White proceeds 9.g4.

Variation :–
5...Nc6 6.f4 Bd6 7.g3 0-0 8.e4 Qc7 9.f5, &c.

In both cases, says the writer, White has a good position for attack, always reckoning the inferiority of the opponent. The "Debut Vazquez" is singular in this, that on [sic] matter what Black plays, White can always make the first five moves given above. Senor Vazquez hopes that the masters will analyze this opening and make their opinions known – Baltimore Sunday News

In our January number it was stated (p.11), on the authority of the Baltimore Sunday News, that the first player, conceding the odds of Q Kt, can always make the five following moves, whatever Black may reply :– 1.c3, 2.Qc2, 3.d3, 4.Bd2, 5.0-0-0. "East Marden," however, suggests for Black :– 1.e6, 2.Qf6, 3.Bc5, 4.Qxf2+ (no castling for White now!), 5.Qxf1, 6.Qxg2, 7.Qxh1! and White's game is hopeless. Senor Vazquez, who proposes the opening, would of course alter his tactics at the fourth move to avoid the impending catastrophe. All that is asserted is it is incorrect to say that the five moves can in all cases be played.

To play chess well

From the February 1900 issue of the British Chess Magazine

Game Department

The Openings - A correspondent writes to us that he has carefully gone through Mr. Blackburne's lately published book [Mr. Blackburne's Games at Chess], and he finds that in nearly every game won by Mr. Blackburne, from weaker opponents, the loser had really a lost game, theoretically, somewhere about the tenth move in the game, and in many games even earlier. We cannot say whether this be so or not, as we have not had the leisure to play all the games over, but we incline to the belief that our correspondent's conclusion is pretty nearly correct. Our own experience is that at least 90 per cent of games played between experts and inexperienced amateurs are practically lost by the amateurs before they have made a dozen moves. To play chess well, a fair knowledge of the openings is absolutely essential. The chess player who tries to construct his game on a faulty opening, is like the architect who builds his edifice on a rotten foundation. Both are bound to collapse to well-directed pressure. Moral: look to your theory, and beware of the individual who ostentatiously tells you, as if it is something to be proud of, that he knows nothing of the openings. If you search him, it is more than likely you will find him possessed of a pocket edition of the chess openings, to which he refers much oftener than to his bible or prayer-book – Hereford Times