Pawn Wave

Whether it is in the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+), the Semi-Italian Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.various Bc5 5.Bxf7+), or the Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nc4 4.Bxf7+), the pawns that White receives for his sacrificed piece(s) are very important. Sometimes these "Jerome pawns" advance like a wall and make mischief. Sometimes they advance like a wave.

perrypawnpusher - theferno
blitz FICS, 2010

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4

4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Ke8

Wow – didn't I just play this?

6.Qh5+ g6 7.Nxg6 hxg6 8.Qxg6+

I'm sure glad that I read this blog, where this line was recently analyzed.

The New Year's Database has 61 games with this line, with White scoring 61%. (Remember the caution about statistics: Your mileage may vary.)

8... Ke7 9.Qg5+ Nf6

This move is stronger than 9...Ke8, which should have led to a draw after 10.Qg6+ etc. Instead, perrypawnpusher - adamzzzz, blitz FICS, 2009 continued: 10.Qe5+ Qe7 11.Qxd4 Bg7 12.Qc4 Kd8 13.Nc3 Nf6 14.0-0 c6 15.d4 d5 16.exd5 Nxd5 17.Nxd5 cxd5 18.Qxd5+ Qd7 19.Bg5+ Kc7 20.Qc5+ Qc6 21.Qxc6+ bxc6 22.c3 Rb8 23.b3 Rh5 24.Bf4+ Kb7 25.Bxb8 Kxb8 26.Rae1 Ba6 27.Re8+ Kc7 28.Rfe1 Bh6 29.R8e5 Rxe5 30.Rxe5 Bd2 31.c4 Bc3 32.Re4 Bb7 33.d5 cxd5 34.cxd5 Bxd5 35.Re7+ Kb6 36.h4 Bf6 37.Rd7 Be6 38.Rd6+ Kc7 39.Rxe6 Black resigned

10.Qc5+ d6 11.Qxd4

Fritz8 gives a slight edge to Black here, but I am sure that any Jerome Gambit Gemeinde member would be happy with the four pawns that White has in exchange for his sacrificed Bishop.

11...Qd7

I am not sure of Black's idea, here. Perhaps he initially thought of following this up with ...Qd7-g4 – a good idea against my next move (12.f3 was more to the point). Otherwise, 11...Bg7 was a good alternative.

12.Nc3 Bg7

Again, 12...Qg4 was a reasonable choice.

13.Nd5+

After the game Rybka preferred: 13.h3 b5 14.d3 c5 15.Qe3 Bb7 16.Ne2 Kd8 with and edge to White. Must be the pawns.

analysis diagram






13...Nxd5

This capture is a mistake. Better, according to Rybka, was 13...Kf7 14.Ne3 Qc6 15.d3 Ng4 16.Qd5+ Qxd5 17.Nxd5 Nxh2 18.Ke2 c6 19.Ne3 Be6 20.f4 Rag8 21.Bd2 Ke7 22.Bc3 Bxc3 23.bxc3 when Black's pieces put good pressure on White's pawns, for an advantage.

analysis diagram





14.Qxg7+ Ke6 15.Qxh8 Nb4

White is up the exchange – plus those great Kingside pawns – so the next move is not hard to understand.

16.Qh3+ Ke7 17.Qxd7+ Bxd7 18.Kd1 Rf8

Black has a temporary advantage in development, but once White is safe, the pawns can roll.

19.f3 Kd8 20.d3 d5

21.Bg5+ Kc8 22.e5 Rf5 23.f4 d4 24.g4 Rf8 25.f5

25...Nd5 26.e6 Bc6 27.Re1 Rg8 28.h4

Black resigned

Walled In

The following game, featuring a Semi-Italian Opening (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6) with a Jerome Gambit twist (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+), shows how much you can achieve with a basic "sac and attack" attitude.

Of particular interest is the positional role that the "Jerome pawns" play early on.

 Wall - Ydiens

blitz 15 0, FICS, 2010

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

4.Bxf7+

Bill Wall is determined to have his attack, and wastes no time on "tempo moves" like 4.0-0 or 4.Nc3 or even 4.d3 which would give Black a chance to move his Bishop to where it could become a target at c5.

What surprised me when I looked up this position in the New Year's Database was how frequently 4.Bxf7+ had been played – there are 857 such games. Alas, White scored only 39% in them. (Of course, that could mean that Bill hasn't played enough 4.Bxf7+ games yet, so he hasnt' had much chance to boost the average.)

By contrast, there were only 157 games which went 4.0-0, 4.Nc3, or 4.d3 followed by 4...Bc5 5.Bxf7+. White scored 51% in them. (4.0-0 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ scored best at 85%).

4...Kxf7 5.0-0 Nf6

6.d4 

At this point, out of the blue, I remembered another Wall game, a proto-Semi-Italian Jerome Gambit: Wall - Vargas, San Antonio, 1979: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.d4 exd4 5.0-0 h6 6.Nh4 Nxe4 7.Qh5 g6 8.Bxf7+ Kxf7 9.Qxg6+ Ke7 10.Nf5 checkmate

analysis diagram





6...exd4 7.e5

Let's say you were going to play the Max Lange, but your opponent played ...h7-h6 instead of ...Bf8-c5, and you wanted to play e4-e5 without Black responding ...d7-d5 – hitting your Bishop – so you decide to sac your Bishop before he gets the chance...

Okay, okay, actually I don't know what's going on, but like a Supreme Court justice once said, "I don't know what 'good chess' is, but I know it when I see it!"

Or something like that.

7...Nd5 8.Nxd4 Nxd4 9.Qxd4 c6

Black has a piece for a pawn, but his practical difficulties give White some compensation: the unsheltered King and the poor state of Black's development.

10.c4 Ne7 11.c5 Nd5

The Knight has gotten a little exercise, but the "Jerome pawns" have been working, too. With Black so cramped, White doesn't feel a need to hurry.

12.Nc3 Nxc3 13.Qxc3 Be7

It seems a bit contrary to advise Black to not develop a piece, but attacking the advanced pawn at c5 with ...b7-b6, on this move or the next, was better.

14.f4 Re8 15.f5

15...Bg5

We've seen this kind of position before: the computer says that things are about even, but White's position is a lot more fun to play.

16.Qb3+ Kf8

Rybka prefers 16...d5 17.cxd6+ Kf8, although one glance is enough to know why Black avoided that line: the pawns!

17.f6

17...g6 18.Bxg5 hxg5 19.Qh3

The end is near. The pawns are still walling Black in.

19...d5 20.Qh8+ Kf7 21.e6+ Black resigned

Database Alternative

On January 1, 2010 I offered Readers a PGN database of over 17,000 Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+), Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4 4.Bxf7+), and Semi-Italian Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.0-0/4.Nc3/4.d3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+) games. 

That size database might be too large for Readers who use ChessBase Light, so I have sliced the New Year's Database "pie" into three files: two of 6,000 games apiece, and one not quite that size.

Just email me: richardfkennedy@hotmail.com and make the request if you are interested.

A Sneaky Way to Defeat the Jerome Gambit

If things weren't bad enough for the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) – an opening with several refutations – last week I found another way to get beaten. This one might be The End for the Jerome, at least as it is played in the on-line communities such as the Free Internet Chess Server (FICS).

perrypawnpusher - "anonymous"

blitz 10 0, FICS, 2010

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

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 7.Qd5+

At this point, my opponent disconnected from FICS.

I waited a couple of minutes, and, sure enough, he re-connected.

I issued a "resume" offer. He ignored it. Then, a bit later, he started a game with someone else.

Being a patient (but persistent) guy, I "observed" that second game, and when it was over, I issued another "resume" offer to "anonymous".

My opponent ignored it again.

Being also polite, I "messaged" him that I hoped we could run into each other again online, and finish our game.

I stopped back at FICS several times a day over the next few days, but did not run into "anonymous". I did not receive any return "message" or email, either.

Then I received a "message" that the game had been adjudicated in my opponent's favor.

Of course, I protested this in a return "message", but my "message" was met with the notice "mailbox full". (Later I learned that the adjudication message had come from a 'bot.)

I then "messaged" and emailed The Powers That Be at FICS, and learned back from them... 

If you have a question regarding an outcome of adjudication you may appeal the decision by messaging adjudicate. Make sure the game is still in your history or at least in your journal so that they may review it again...We cannot do anything if the game is no longer able to be viewed...

This was no help. I suppose that as long as the game was "adjourned", it was in my history, but as soon as perrypawnpusher - "anonymous" was adjudicated, the game was over and apparently it disappeared.

...You will have to provide analysis why you feel that the decision was incorrect...

 If I had analysis proving that White was better or even in the Jerome Gambit, I'd be writing a book about it (with a Foreword by Magnus Carlsen). All I have is my 87% score with it and a willingness to gamble.

...A disconnect is not adjudicated as an automatic loss. The loss was because you were behind in material and your opponent took advantage of that fact when requesting an adjudication. Sometimes when a gambit is being played and the material count is reflecting that, an abusive user can take advantage by disconnecting...

Really.

So, here is a caution to anyone playing the Jerome Gambit and its relatives – especially AlgozBR, BobTheBeginner, DragonTail, drumme, fmarius, Irvpat, Itajuba, jfhumphrey, Petasluk, Rattymouse, sTpny, stretto, UNPREDICTABLE, yorgos and hundreds of others who play Jerome-ish openings at my favorite chess site, FICS – know the rules of your site regarding disconnections, know who you are playing against, and be careful that your opponent is an above-the-board player, or your next Jerome Gambit might look like this:

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 Black disconnected, game later adjudicated a win for Black.

Even folks who play the King's Gambit might have to fear

1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 Black disconnected, game later adjudicated a win for Black (see "The King's Gambit is Busted" by R. Fischer).

Shillings: One Found, Two Lost (Part 3)

After my first game against xenoglot (see "Shillings: One Found, Two Lost (Part 2)") my opponent challenged me to another game. I quickly agreed, figuring One game with White, one game with Black, makes sense and seems fair to me...

When the board popped up on the monitor in front of me, however, I saw that I had the White pieces again. Oh, he wanted that kind of re-match.

perrypawnpusher - xenoglot
blitz 2 12, FICS, 2010

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4

The Blackburne Shilling Gambit.

4.Bxf7+

The Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit.

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Ke8

As in my first game with xenoglot.

6.Qh5+ g6 7.Nxg6 Nxc2+

 My opponent's improvement over his previous 7...Nf6. Better yet was 7...hxg6.

8.Kd1 Nf6

It is ironic that in developing this Knight now, xenoglot makes the same mis-play as in our previous game. Of course, there are 25 other games with this move in the New Year's Database.

After 8...hxg6 White doesn't have anything "objectively" better than 9.Qxg6+ Ke7 10.Qg5+ Ke8 11.Qg6+ repeating the position for a draw, although he does have alternatives.

9.Qe5+ Kf7

Forcing my hand, but things will not turn out right.

10.Nxh8+ Kg8 11.Kxc2 Kxh8

White is ahead two pawns and the exchange, but he lags in development and his King is not yet safe.

12.d4 d6 13.Qg5 Bg7 14.Nc3 c5

We've seen a hyper-modern touch in the Jerome Gambit before.

My plan is to work on development and use my advantages later.

15.Be3 Qe8 16.f3 Nd7

The tactical shot 16...Ng4 17.fxg4 cxd4 18.Bxd4 Bxd4 was stronger and had the benefit of busting up White's center.

17.Rad1 Bf6 18.Qg3 cxd4 19.Bxd4 Ne5

Fighting until the end.

20.f4 Nf7

The end: the Knight had to go to d7 or g4.

 21.Bxf6 checkmate

Shillings: One Found, Two Lost (Part 2)

Applying the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) treatment to the Blackburne Shilling Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4) has become a standard plan when my favorite opening meets someone's favorite defense. So far I have scored 13 wins against 2 losses and 1 draw, so I'm not likely to change my play any time soon.

perrypawnpusher - xenoglot

blitz 2 12, FICS, 2010

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4

4.Bxf7+

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Ke8

Checking the New Year's Database (which I have been updating regularly) I note that the Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit has scored 56% (based on 2,292 games),  but that the per centage jumps to 61% (based on 1,076 games) in the 5...Ke6 line. (All cautions about statistics, of course, apply.) 

6.Qh5+ g6 7.Nxg6 Nf6

A good look at this line can be found in "Please, don't do that..." and "It's a good thing I read this blog".

Rybka says that developing the King's Knight gives White a small advantage, and instead recommends: 7...hxg6 8.Qxg6+ Ke7 9.Qg5+ Nf6 (for 9...Ke8 see perrypawnpusher - adamzzzz, blitz FICS, 2009)10.Qc5+ Kf7 11.Qxd4 d5 when Black has an edge.

8.Qe5+ Ne6

At this point in one game, my opponent resigned: perrypawnpusher - fintrade, blitz FICS, 2009.


9.Nxh8 Bg7 10.d4

10...c6 11.Bg5 Bxh8

Black has two pieces for a Rook and three pawns – but these are "Jerome pawns"!

12.Bxf6

After the game Rybka preferred straight development with 12.Nc3. I think that is because it did not see going into an endgame as strong as staying in the middle game.

12...Bxf6

Better, according to the computer, was 12...Qxf6 13.Qxf6 Bxf6
when White has only an edge. I would have been happy to follow that line, though.

13.Qh5+

On revient toujours à ses premières amours...

13...Ke7 14.Qxh7+ Ke8 15.e5 Be7

With three connected passed pawns and a Rook for Black's two Bishops, White is better – but how to convert the advantage?

16.Qh5+ Kf8 17.Qf5+ Ke8 18.Qg6+ Kf8 19.Qf5+ Kg7

I was checking the King and even repeating the position in order to pick up some time to think a bit deeper. My opponent apparently took this as indecision or confusion on my part. This kind of thought process can lead to over-confidence, which is not good. 

Xenoglot should have returned his King to e8 and seen if I really wanted a draw – which would have been a favorable outcome for him at this point.

20.0-0 Nxd4

See what I mean? Over-confidence can allow one to fall into the shallowest of traps.

21.Qg4+ Kf8 22.Qxd4 Ke8

From here, Black's position slowly disintegrates.

23.Nc3 d6 24.exd6 Bxd6 25.Rfe1+ Kd7 26.Rad1

Even stronger was 26.Qg7+.

26...Qf8 27.Ne4 c5 28.Qxd6+ Qxd6 29.Nxd6 

29...Kc6 30.Nxc8 Rxc8 31.h4 b5

32.h5 a5 33.Re6+ Kb7 34.Rd7+ Ka8 35.Ree7 Rc6 36.Re8+ Rc8 37.Rxc8 checkmate

My opponent immediately challenged me to a rematch...

Shillings: One Found, Two Lost (Part 1)

Sometime back I contacted Edward Winter, of "Chess Notes" and Chess History fame, with some questions about the origin and naming of the Blackburne Shilling Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4). He posted my query, and recently presented some relevant information. 

3786. Blackburne Shilling Gambit

From Rick Kennedy (Columbus, OH, USA):

‘The opening 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nd4 has been called the Blackburne Shilling Gambit, in recognition, apparently, of J.H. Blackburne’s use of it to win small stakes from players. However, I have yet to find a single game with it played by Blackburne. In fact, the earliest game uncovered was played in New Zealand in 1911. How did Blackburne’s name become attached to the variation? Indeed, when did it become attached?

Steinitz’s Modern Chess Instructor has a note on the line, but does not refer to Blackburne. Mr Blackburne’s Games at Chess makes no mention of it. Nor does Freeborough and Ranken’s Chess Openings Ancient and Modern attribute the line (given in a footnote) to anyone. E.E. Cunnington’s books (one on traps, one on openings for beginners), which were published in London shortly after the turn of the century, give the moves but do not name Blackburne.

One clue may be that the first edition of Hooper and Whyld’s Oxford Companion to Chess (1984) does not call the line by name, but the second edition (1992) calls it the Blackburne Shilling Gambit. Did the co-authors discover some historical information during that eight-year period?’

6470. Blackburne Shilling Gambit (C.N. 3786)

From page 429 of the December 1897 American Chess Magazine:

"All chess life seems to be with America," writes an esteemed and particularly well-posted English correspondent. "A great change has come over English chess. The 'old masters' are dying out. The new-born strength of amateurs has slaughtered them. They have no prestige. Names once of weight are now spoken of with contempt. No new professionals are coming in – no new Blackburnes or Birds. The 'nimble shilling,' for which the old professionals played at the Divan, is now too hardly earned. The country joskins know the openings and the principles, and instead of Bird's giving a Queen and winning twenty games in an hours, as I have seen ('hoc egomet oculis mei vidi'), he plays on even terms, and of five games wins only the odd one and a shilling. The ancient 'Shilling Gambit' is no longer a thing of dread. Young men from Birmingham walk into the Divan without awe and speak of giving odds. And the late H. Macaulay of this city (now Birmingham) actually conceded the Knight to a master who played and won a prize in the Manchester International, and Macaulay, giving the odds, won a majority of the games." - New Orleans Times-Democrat.