Montgomery Major Attack

Even when it comes to the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+), and especially when it comes to related openings, there always seems something new to discover.

Imagine my surprise when, thumbing through John Lutes' Tennsion Gambit I encountered the following line of play

1.e4 d5 2.Nf3

This is the Tennison Gambit, which also can be reached via the Zukertort Opening, i.e. 1.Nf3 d5 2.e4.

2...dxe4 3.Ng5 e5

There is a superficial similarity to the Budapest Gambit (1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5) here, with colors reversed, although the fact that Black has not played ...c7-c5 in the Tennison actually strengthens his position, as the traditional ...Bb4+ in the Budapest – Bb5+ in the Tennison – is more easily met.

4.Nxf7 Kxf7 5.Qh5+

Things are already beginning to look a little Jerome-ish, moreso after 5...g6 6.Qxe5, when White looks forward to two pawns for his sacrificed piece and play against Black's vulnerable King.

The Montgomery Major Attack is named after an early editor of Chess Life, who published his analysis of the line in Chess Correspondent in the early 1960s.

Final: JGTourney4 ChessWorld 2009

JGTourney4 ChessWorld 2009

----------------------1--2--3--4--5--6--7--8--9-10-11-12-13-14-15

1 Piratepaul --------** 01 10 11 11 10 11 01 11 11 01 11 11 10 11 -22.0/28
2 stampyshortlegs ---10 ** 11 01 01 11 01 10 10 1½ 11 11 11 10 11 -20.5/28
3 Sir Osis ----------01 00 ** 00 11 11 11 11 11 00 01 11 01 11 11 -19.0/28
4 DREWBEAR63---------00 10 11 ** 11 01 01 01 00 00 11 11 01 11 11 -17.0/28
5 GladtoMateYou------00 10 00 00 ** 01 01 01 11 01 11 11 11 11 11 -17.0/28
6 Luke Warm ---------01 00 00 10 10 ** 10 01 ½1 11 01 01 ½1 11 01 -15.0/28
7 Haroldlee123-------00 10 00 10 10 01 ** 11 11 00 0½ ½0 11 11 11 -15.0/28
8 eddie43------------10 01 00 10 10 10 00 ** 11 1½ 10 00 01 11 11 -14.5/28
9 TWODOGS------------00 01 00 11 00 ½0 00 00 ** ½1 11 11 01 11 11 -14.0/28
10 Black Puma--------00 0½ 11 11 10 00 11 0½ ½0 ** 01 00 01 01 11 -13.5/28
11 blackburne--------10 00 10 00 00 10 1½ 01 00 10 ** 11 11 01 11 -13.5/28
12 gwyn1-------------00 00 00 00 00 10 ½1 11 00 11 00 ** 01 00 11 -9.5/28
13 metalwarrior1969--00 00 10 10 00 ½0 00 10 10 10 00 10 ** 01 11 -9.5/28
14 Crusader Rabbit---01 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 10 10 11 10 ** 00 -7.0/28
15 calchess10--------00 00 00 00 00 10 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 11 ** -3.0/28

A Pie-in-the-Face Variation

If you play the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ ) long enough, you will eventually play the 6.d4 variation (4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.d4) and one day you will come face-to-face with the best in-your-face variation for Black since J.H. Blackburne offered his Rook...  

This move (6...Qh4) was first seen in Sorensen - Anonymous, Denmark 1888 (see "Jerome Gambit Tournament: Chapter X").

I have 193 games with 6...Qh4 in my database, with only 10 wins for Black, but those numbers are deeply flawed, as most of the games are computer vs computer, and the great majority of those come from a source that only provided White wins (see "Bright Ideas from Silicon"). Of the 8 person vs person 6...Qh4 games in my database, White has won 4 and lost 4, which still seems overly optimistic to me.

Here's a quick game to try to sort out the variation.

Danivarl - Bb35
echecsemail.com, 2005

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

5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.d4 Qh4

7.dxc5

This move is simply wrong. If White wants the piece, he should castle first, then go after it: 7.0-0 Qxe4 8.dxc5

Would it be helpful to mention that in their games Deep Shredder 10, Deep Sjeng 1.5, Gambit Fruit1,  Hiarcs 11.1 and Shredder Paderborn all chose 7.0-0 instead of 7.dxc5?

7...Qxe4+

Also leading to an advantage for Black (but not as big a one) is 7...Ng4, from a game earlier this year where the second player was finally able to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory: 8.Qd5+ Kf8 9.g3 Qf6 10.Be3 Ne7 11.Qd2 Qxb2 12.0-0 Qxa1 13.Nc3 Qb2 14.f3 Nxe3 15.Qxe3 Qxc2 16.Ne2 Qxa2 17.f4 d6 18.f5 Nc6 19.f6 Bh3 20.fxg7+ Kxg7 21.Qg5 checkmate, yorgos - mofte, FICS, 2009.

8.Be3

A bit better (but still very good for Black) was 8.Kf1, but after 8...Nf6 White has to be scolding himself: I sacrificed a piece for this position?? 

8...Qxg2

Black went after the other Knight pawn with 8...Qb4+  in AlgozBr - nikolasa, FICS 2009, a wild game where the second player maintained his advantage for a score of moves and then swapped blunders with White at the end. To be fair, the first player waited to get a winning position before resigning (or losing on time): 9.Nc3 Qxb2 10.Qd5+ Kf8 11.0-0 Qxc3 12.Bd4 Qxc2 13.Qxe5 Qg6 14.Qf4+ Nf6 15.Qxc7 Nd5 16.Qd8+ Qe8 17.Bxg7+ Kxg7 18.Qg5+ Qg6 19.Qxd5 Rg8 20.Rae1 Kh8 21.Re7 d6 22.cxd6 Bh3 23.Rfe1 Bxg2 0-1

9.Rf1 Nf3+ 10.Ke2 Nf6

Just to show you that the Jerome Gambit belongs to the Twilight Zone of chess openings, here is a game where Black chose 10...Qg4 instead,  11.Qd5+ Ke7 12.Qxf3 Qxf3+ 13.Kxf3 d5 14.Bd4 Nf6 15.Nc3 Bg4+ 16.Kf4 h5 17.Rae1+ Kd7 18.f3 Bh3 19.Rg1 Rae8 20.Rxg7+ Kc8 21.Reg1 Nd7 22.R7g3 Rhf8+ 23.Kg5 Be6 24.Kxh5 Rh8+ 25.Kg5 Rxh2 26.Kf4 Rxc2 27.Nb5 c6 28.Nd6+ Kd8 29.Nxe8 Kxe8 30.b4 Rc4 31.Ke3 Rxb4 32.Rh1 Kf7 33.Rg7+ Ke8 34.Rh8+ Nf8 35.Rg6 Bf7 36.Rg5 Rb1 37.Re5+ Kd7 38.Rxf8 Re1+ 39.Kf4 Rxe5 40.Bxe5 Be6 41.Kg3 a5 42.f4 Ke7 43.Rf6 a4 44.Rh6 Kf7 45.Rh7+ Kg6 46.Rxb7 Kf5 47.Rb6 Ke4 48.Rxc6 Bf5 49.Ra6 Kd3 50.Rxa4 Kc2 51.c6 d4 52.c7 d3 53.Rd4 Kd1 54.c8Q Black resigned, yorgos - ErrareHumanumEst, FICS, 2009

Yes, the name of the second player translates from the Latin as "to err is human."

11.Qd3

You know you're doomed when you can play a move like 11.Nd2 instead and Black can safely ignore it, as after 11...d5 12.Nxf3 Bg4 it is still a sad position for White.

11...Ne5 12.Qb3+ d5 13.Nd2 Bg4+

White's downfall is his unsafe King: the irony!

14.Ke1 Rhe8 15.Qxb7

Leading to an explosive conclusion.

15...Nd3+ 16.cxd3 Rxe3+ White resigned

Teach / Learn

Welton Vaz ("Ghandybh" at Chess.com) shares a Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) game (for an earlier one, see "Xadrez, Ficção Cientifíca e Paz" or visit his "Chess, Science Fiction and Peace" blog).

Looking at the end of the game – a nice mate-in-7 – you can understand why people play the Jerome.

Ghandybh  - ishahir
Chess.com, 2009

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

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6

7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 Nc6

Alarms should be going off inside the head of every Jerome Gambit Gemeinde member. If Black varies from one of the main line this early, there has to be a nasty surprise waiting for him. (For one such example, see "Lost".)

9.e5+

Welton is thinking "King!" A more routine (if safer) response would be picking up a piece with 9.Qd5+ Ke7 10.Qxc5+.

9...Ke7

Black has the option of giving a piece back willingly: 9...Nxe5 10.Qxe5+ Kc6 11.d4 Qe7 12.d5+ Kb6 13.Nc3 Qxe5+ 14.fxe5 d6 15.Na4+ Kb5 16.b3 Bd4 17.c4+ Ka5 18.Bd2+ Ka6 19.b4 b6 20.Rb1 Bxe5 21.c5 dxc5 22.bxc5 Bf5 23.Rc1 Bd4 24.cxb6 axb6 25.Rf1 Re8+ 26.Kd1 Bg4+ 27.Kc2 Nf6 28.h3 Bh5 29.g4 Bg6+ 30.Kb3 Nxd5 31.Bc3 Nxc3 32.Nxc3 Bxc3 33.Rxc3 c5 34.Kb2 Rhf8 35.Ra3+ Kb7 36.Rd1 Rd8 37.Re1 Rf2+ 38.Kc1 Rd7 39.Rae3 Rff7 40.h4 h6 41.g5 hxg5 42.hxg5 Kc7 43.a4 Rd3 44.Re7+ Rxe7 45.Rxe7+ Kb8 46.Rxg7 Be4 47.g6 Rd6 48.Rg8+ Kc7 49.g7 Rg6 50.Re8 Rxg7 51.Rxe4 Rg1+ 52.Kd2 Rg2+ 53.Kc3 Ra2 54.Kc4 Kc6 55.Re6+ Kb7 56.Kb5 Rb2+ 57.Kc4 Rb4+ 58.Kc3 Rxa4 59.Re7+ Ka6 60.Re8 Black forfeited on time. Superpippo - MattMeister, FICS, 2002. This is one of the games whose end position was given in "Superpippo and the Third Player".

10.Qg5+ Ke6

It is fun to speculate – did Black play this move because he thought it was best (it's not; 10...Kf8 is better) or was he thinking of letting White off the hook by allowing him a draw through repetition, i.e. 11.Qg4+ Ke7 12.Qg5+ Ke6, etc.?

11.Qxg7

Of course, Welton is not thinking "Draw?!"

11...Nge7

There's a lesson to be learned here: don't be greedy. Giving back a piece – Black has two extra – with 11...Nf6 maintained the second player's advantage.

The game is over now.

12.Qf6+ Kd5 13.Nc3+ Kc4 14.Qf7+ d5 15.exd6+ Kd4 16.Nb5+ Ke4 17.d3 checkmate

Blunder Check

When I finish a chess game, especially one with the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+), I often turn it over to Deep Rybka to analyze, using the "blunder check" mode set at 5 minutes per move. Usually the computer gives me variations that show where I missed an opportunity to win a pawn, or where I unnecessarily gave up a piece, or where I overlooked giving or receiving a checkmate...

I thought I played pretty well in the following game, so I was totally unprepared for the comments from my electronic partner.

perrypawnpusher  - saltos

blitz, FICS, 2009

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6

Ah, the Semi-Italian Opening. See here, here, and here for more information.

4.0–0 Bc5 5.Bxf7+

5...Kxf7 6.Nxe5+ Nxe5 7.Qh5+ Ng6

The 7...Ng6 defense (as opposed to, say, 7...Ke6) is not "bad", but I wonder if it is "best", as it allows White to capture the Bishop at c5, which was doing a good job of pinning the White f-pawn and preventing its advance.

8.Qd5+ Ke8 9.Qxc5 d6 10.Qe3 Qf6

This is a new move in this position, but it is a good one. In fact, throughout the game Black seems to be making good moves and having a good position. Then he loses.

11.f4 N8e7 12.Nc3 c6

Now it's time for a series of moves, a kind that we've seen before (see "I apologize, Jerome Gambit" and "Diagnosis: Misplaced Knight").

13.f5 Ne5 14.d4 Nc4 15.Qd3 b5 16.b3 Nb6

17.Bf4

This leads to a small advantage, Rybka says. Instead, the computer recommends: 17.e5 Qh4 18.Ne4 Nxf5 19.g3 Qe7 20.exd6 Qf7 21.Nc5 Qd5 22.Bb2 Kd8 23.d7 Bxd7 24.Nxd7 Nxg3 25.hxg3 Qxd7 26.Qg6 Re8 27.Rf7 Qe6 28.Rxg7 Qxg6 29.Rxg6 Kc7 30.Rg7+ Kd6 31.Rf1 Rg8 32.Rf6+. 

analysis diagram






Um, sure, er, well, yes – that's exactly the other line I was considering...

17...Nd7

Not good enough. Rybka suggests: 17...b4 18.Ne2 a5 19.Qg3 Ba6 20.Rae1 d5 21.Bc7 Nd7 22.Qe3 Ra7 23.Bg3 Kd8 24.e5 Qg5 25.Qf2 Rh7 26.Bh4 Qd2 27.Nf4 Qxf2+ 28.Rxf2 Nf8 29.e6 Bb5 30.Rc1 with only a small advantage for White.

analysis diagram






Yes, I'm sure I heard my opponent muttering: Rooks on Rook two! Rooks on Rook two! What a fool I was! (Not really.)

18.Rae1 Qf7

Looking at this diagram, would you figure that Black was more than a piece worse than White? Rybka would.

 19.Bxd6 Nf6

Going down the equivalent of a Rook, according to Rybka, which suggests the following, instead: 19...Nb6 20.d5 b4 21.Bxb4 a5 22.Bxe7 Qxe7 23.d6 Qe5 24.Nd5 Rb8 25.Ne7 Qc5+ 26.Rf2 Rb7 27.Ng6 Rg8 28.e5 Rd7 29.Qe4 Qb4 30.c4.

analysis diagram








I don't think I understand chess anymore...

20.Bxe7 Kxe7 21.e5 Nd5 22.f6+ Kf8

Allows mate in 16, Rybka says. Sure, I knew that... Lucky for me, Black now falls apart.

23.fxg7+ Kxg7 24.Rxf7+ Kxf7 25.Qf3+

25...Ke7 26.Nxd5+ Kd8 27.Qf6+ Kd7 28.Qe7 checkmate

Lost

If a visitor to the Black side of the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) loses the way in the opening, as is often the case, it is the responsibility (and pleasure) of the first player to deliver a stinging rejoinder.


guest2036 - guest612
blitz 2 12 ICC, 2001

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

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Ke8
This King retreat, instead of to f8, is unusual, and the Jerome Gambiteer should be looking for a strong reply.

6.Qh5+

This was enough for one opponent of Louis Morin, playing at the Internet Chess Club in 2004: it was met with Black's resignation!

Leading to a small advantage for White was 6.Nxc6

6...g6

The alternative 6...Ke7 is a disaster. See "One (or both) of us needs help" (Part I) and (Part II).

7.Nxg6 Nf6
The twin games Hultgren - Harrow, SVE cup, Campbell, CA, 1960 and Blackstone - Dommeyer, skittles, Campbell, CA 1960 continued: 7...Bxf2+ 8.Kxf2 Qf6+ 9.Nf4+ Kd8 10.d3 d6 11.Rf1 Qd4+ 12.Be3 Qf6 13.c3 Black resigned.

8.Qxc5 hxg6 9.d3 d6 10.Qc3 Rf8

Here we have the typical Jerome Gambit imbalance, pawns vs a piece (only this time White has three pawns).

11.Bg5 Be6

Rybka 3 recommends 11...d5 to keep the game even, but that may have been too "open" for Black.

12.Nd2 a5

An interesting psychological aspect to this game: what is Black supposed to be doing? White has a number of ideas to follow up, but his opponent can only think to put a Knight on b4.

13.0-0 Nb4 14.a3 Na6

Going back to Nc6 was probably better.

15.Rae1 c6


16.e5

The break-through, although he might have prepared for it with 16.Nf3.

16...dxe5 17.Qxe5 Nc7 18.Ne4 Ra6

19.Nxf6+ Kf7 20.Nh7 Re8 21.Bxd8 Rxd8 22.Qxc7+ Black resigned




graphic by Jeff Bucchino, The Wizard of Draws

Superpippo and the Third Player

When a sports team has the enthusiastic support of the crowd, the players work harder and strive mightily to reward their fans. In a football game (NFL, FIFA) a strong crowd can have such an effect that they can be thought of as the "12th player" for the team that they are cheering on.

Chess is a game between two players, but sometimes the clock and the time controls weigh in as the "third player". This is often the case when one is playing the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+).

The first player may be struggling with his opponent, but the unexpected and unusual play of the Jerome Gambit will set time-consuming problems for the other side, and that is often enough to swing the "third player" into action.

To win the game, you have to Beat the Clock.

Here are a few examples from the blitz games of Superpippo. In all games he is White. It is Black's turn to move, but he has been fighting two "players"...





Two interesting positions, but Black's flag dropped in each, giving White the game.











More of the same: tick-tock, tick-tock, tick-tock...












Things looked bad for White, until time ran out... on Black.









These positions are getting silly, but when Black's time was up White grabbed the point.