Behind the scenes...?

Here are a couple of games that leave me wanting to say "Hey, things can't be that bad!" or "Well, things can't be that good!". Truth to be told, there was probably something going on behind the scenes that accounted for the abrupt termination of each game.

MoosMutz  - catcheck
blitz, FICS, 2010

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


Nesseerd - MithrasHH
blitz, FICS, 2011

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

Sunday Book Review: Attack With the Blackmar Diemer by Guido de Bouver

The Blackmar Diemer Gambit (1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3) is the Captain Jack Sparrow (from the "Pirates of the Caribbean" movies) of chess openings.

One observer will cavil that Captain Jack Sparrow is, "without doubt the worst pirate I've ever heard of," while another will gush "That's got to be the best pirate I've ever seen."

So, too, with the Blackmar Diemer Gambit as a chess opening. It inspires side-taking.

Of course, a more objective, balanced, look at the BDG, say Christoph Scheerer's recent The Blackmar-Diemer Gambit: A Modern Guide to a Fascinating Chess Opening from Everyman Chess, is bound to give a more nuanced assessment.

The link in the above paragraph is useful: it connects to a review of Scheerer's book by Tim Sawyer, who has written a number of BDG texts himself. Further, the review is hosted at Tom's BDG Pages, by Tom Purser, a BDG player and author himself, and past editor of the long-running "BDG World" magazine. 

(It's hard not to add the name of Tim McGrew to this duo, as he has written on any number of unorthodox openings – including the BDG. Scheerer references all three in his book, although he makes the humorous slip of calling all of them "Tim". Sorry, Tom.)

In his review, Sawyer is impressed with Scheerer's extensive investigation of the Blackmar Diemer Gambit, noting

Scheerer lists a 3 page bibliography of major articles, books, cds, dvds, databases, periodicals and websites.

Of import is what follows

Only the excellent works from 2010 by Eric Jego and by Guido de Bouver are missing.

Which brings us to the subject of today's review, one of those "excellent works", Attack With the Blackmar Diemer by Guido de Bouver, sub-titled A Computer Analysis of the Teichmann, Gunderam, O'Kelly and Vienna lines in the Blackmar Diemer gambit.

For those not so familiar with the BDG, that means 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 (or 4...c6, O'Kelly; or 4...Bf5, Vienna) 5.Nxf3 Bg4 (or 5...Bf5, Gunderam) Teichmann. 

I have to admit to a moment of unease when I first read that phrase "A Computer Analysis".

I know that no serious modern day opening analyst (or, as in the case of the Jerome Gambit, an un-serious opening analyst) dares to venture into a forest of variations without a silicon sabre at his (or her) side – if only for clearing out unnecessary foliage and laying bare the main pathways.

Yet my experience with Gary M. Danelishen's fantastic and massive The Final Theory of Chess, to give one example, is that computers can lay open the minds of chess openings, at the risk of impoverishing their souls. That Danelishen placed the Blackmar Diemer Gambit at the center of his White piece repertoire is bold and energetic; but, coming away from the work I was far more likely to yell "amortize those non-convertible debentures, if you would" than sing out "Yo! Ho! Ho! and a bottle of rum!"

I shouldn't have worried. Writes de Bouver

The great majority of chess books assume you know how to keep your pieces safe. Thus, almost all popular chess books are filled with grandiose and subtle strategies to obtain a small positional advantage. As you glance through this book, you will realize that this opening and this book is different. It's about tactics and how a computer deals with them. It doesn't cover subtle positional play, something the average chess player doesn't understand, anyway – it's about the core business of chess – how to get an attack against the enemy king!

I like that.

I've complained elsewhere on this blog that while my best friend, Rybka 3, can spot a tactical shot from over the hill and far away, too often it makes suggestions in a supposedly quiescent position that look like "tweak, adjust, nudge, modify, align..." and I despair of it ever understanding an unbalanced (in all senses of the word) chess opening.

In Attack With the Blackmar Diemer, the human is driving the computer, not the other way around. Score one for de Bouver.

Here are the contents of Attack With the Blackmar Diemer:

Content

1. Introduction     5
1.1. The Blackmar Diemer gambit     5
1.2. About this series and book     11
1.3. Isn't this refuted ?     13
1.4. The Teichmann defense     20
1.5. The Teichmann Exchange defense     22
1.6. The Gunderam defense     25
1.7. The O'Kelly defense     27
1.8. The Vienna defense     31
1.9. Blackmar Diemer versus Smith Morra     32
1.10. Does the Blackmar Diemer win by force ?     34
2. Teichmann defense     36
2.1. The main line     37
2.2. Variations from main line on move 9     51
2.3. Bennett's temptation     58
2.4. Variations from main line on move 8     61
3. Teichmann Exchange defense     67
3.1. 7th move variations     68
3.2. A delayed Ryder gambit     70
3.3. The normal development     72
3.4. Limiting the scope of the g pawn     83
4. Gunderam defense     85
4.1. 6th move variations     86
4.2. Caro Kann reply     88
4.3. Teichmann transpositions     97
4.4. 7th move variations     112
5. O'Kelly defense     117
5.1. Alternate main line     118
5.2. Main line     131
5.3. Critical O'Kelly position     141
5.4. 7th moves variations     144
5.5. The power of the Blackmar Diemer     146
6. Vienna variation     149
6.1. Capturing with the knight     150
6.2. Unzicker variation     151
6.3. Capturing with the bishop     154
7. Summary

After an Introduction (including a Preface and a page of References [score another one for the author] which did not make it to the Content table) the author continues with some information about Armand Edward Blackmar, the American player who developed the Blackmar Gambit (1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.f3), and Emil Josef Diemer, who enlivened the gambit with the interpolation of 3.Nc3 before offering the f-pawn.

Mention is also made of Dr. Ryder, whose gambit (1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Qxf3!?) first enthralled Diemer, and Ignatz von Popiel, who advocated development of the dark-squared White Bishop instead of the offer of the f-pawn (1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5).

As the Contents indicate, early chapters discuss each defense and give an outline of the play that develops. Later chapters give deeper analysis and evaluations that are less wordy. This format works nicely.

The author does not cover every move and line for White, only those which provide him with the best chances for success. It's still quite a lot to keep the first player busy.

de Bouver is most sure about White's chances against the Teichmann defenses, and suggests that a well-prepared defender using the O'Kelly defense is likely to give White the most difficulty (with the Vienna and Gunderam defenses fitting in between the two). It is clear that he is dedicated to the BDG, but he does not allow his fervor to over-ride a sense of balance.

Attack With the Blackmar Diemer tackles the "playability" of the opening on several levels: first, by identifying the traditional "refutations" and giving lines of play against them; second, by alerting the reader to the fact that the opening needs a certain amount of upkeep and updating, lest White lose his edge and tumble off a thin and winding path; and last, by returning to the real world of over-the-board chess play of those who are likely to be using the book

Of course, if black takes the f-pawn, defends like Karpov and plays the endgame like Capablanca, then the proposed move... will not help the attacker, but then again, if you are really facing that kind of opponents, why are you reading this book? From the analyzed lines below, it shows that the attacker obtains dynamic compensation in every line for the offered pawn – which should satisfy every gambiteer...
So to answer the eternal question "Isn't that refuted?", every gambiteer should be happy to answer "Of course", and roll out a new baffling variation with a big smile on his face.

It is this kind of energy and bravado that caused IM Gary Lane, in one of his "Opening Lanes" columns at ChessCafe.com, to note

The good news is that [Guido de Bouver] apparently plans to publish a book on the BDG... My advice if you have a love of the opening is to seek it out and buy it at the first opportunity.

That is a strong endorsement, coming from someone who has written a book on the Blackmar Diemer Gambit himself!

As someone who has played the BDG for decades (and still play it, if someone wants to avoid my Jerome Gambit by playing 1...d5 to my 1.e4 – I counter with 2.d4!?) I happily recommend Attack With the Blackmar Diemer as well. It's a decision as easy as offering the f-pawn.

Simply Down Two

The Blackburne Shilling Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4!?) is supposed to lead to exciting chess for the second player, but when White responds in Jerome Gambit style (4.Bxf7+!?) there is excitement for both players (as GM Lev Alburt pointed out in his March 2011 Chess Life column, "How to Trick the Trickster").

If Black tries further psychology with 4...Ke7?!, either as a form of "Jedi mind trick" (search "mind trick" on this blog, or start here) or out of contrariness, it is up to White to claim his advantage.

The following game ends quickly, as Black realizes that he is simply down two pawns, and those are odds that he did not want to give.

perrypawnpusher  - issamica
blitz, FICS, 2011

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

The Blackburne Shilling Gambit.

4.Bxf7+

The Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit.

4...Ke7

I admit, the first time that zadox played this move against me, in a sort of "Jedi mind trick" (how else to explain my strange chess behavior?), it left me quite indisposed. Readers of this blog should not fall for such a thing, though.

Defenders who decide "if you want me to take the Bishop, then I won't take it" must also live with the consequences of such a position.

5.Bxg8

There is nothing wrong with 5.Bb3 as in perrypawnpusher - Roetman, blitz, FICS, 2010 (1-0, 12); or 5.Bc4 as in perrypawnpusher - vlas, blitz, FICS, 2010 (1-0, 84), perrypawnpusher - zadox, blitz, FICS, 2010 (1-0, 14) or  perrypawnpusher - PlatinumKnight, blitz, FICS, 2010 (1-0, 9).

5...Rxg8 6.Nxe5

It is also quite possible to play 6.Nxd4 or 6.d3.

6...d6

Or 6...Ke8 7.d3 d6 as in perrypawnpusher - TheProducer, blitz, FICS, 2009 (1-0, 16).

7.d3 Ke6

8.Nf3

Playing it safe and sitting on my two pawn advantage.

Adventurous readers would no doubt prefer to offer a piece that cannot be taken, with 8.Qg4+ Ke7 (8...Kxe5 9.Bf4+ Kf6 10.Qg5+ Kf7 11.Qxd8; 8...Kf6 9.Bg5+ Kxe5 10.f4#; 8...Nf5 9.Qxf5+ Ke7 10.Qf7#) 9.Qh5 when White's threat to win the Black Queen with Bg5+ is too much to cope with.

My plan was equally unpalatable to my opponent.

Black resigned

Shortcut

This column was inspired by several recent Jerome Gambit games where White won, although he could have made use of a shortcut to win even faster. With a dicey opening like the Jerome, you grab what you can, when you can! 

Because of lessons learned last year, as we will see, this post could also be titled "What jfhumprey learned".

Teterow  - Neca
lightning, FICS, 2011

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

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.d4

6...Bd6

Black does better with 6...Bxd4 and best with 6...Qh5.

7.dxe5 Bxe5

Despite my previous championing of 8.Qh5+, I think that 8.Qd5+ is simplest and strongest, winning back the piece and leaving White a pawn up, with a safer King.

The current game continued 8.0-0 and White won in 30 moves. A similar game between the same players, the same day, also continued 8.0-0 and White won in 35 moves.

By comparison, HauntedKnight - oldway, blitz, FICS, 2011 continued 8.Qh5+ (1-0, 19), as did HauntedKnight - evgehy, blitz game FICS, 2011 (1-0, 64) and HauntedKnight - sarahdaniel, blitz, FICS, 2011, (1-0, 9; hard to beat that). Again, all games were wins, but 8.Qd5+ might have led to a quicker conclusion in 67% of them.

In light of the above, it is educational to play over jfhumphrey - Cibola, blitz, FICS, 2010 (0-1, 28) and jfhumphrey - biryuk, blitz, FICS, 2010 (0-1, 65) – again, each having reached the third diagram, above – if only to appreciate the later jfhumphrey - stefanomnn, blitz, FICS, 2010 where White discovered 8.Qd5+ and was rewarded with 8...Resigns.

Adjudicated Win

Take a look at the following diagram, from an Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit game (rated, standard, played at FICS) that was adjudicated a win for Black just before his 73rd move. It is to be noted that 5 of Black's 6 pieces are promoted.

RunDem - PoeticFuture, standard, FICS, 2011

Clearly White has defended long, long after many other members of the Jerome Gambit Gemeinde would have conceded.

I would be inclined, were I judging the position, to puckishly ask Black for his intended next move, before ruling. True, he has six moves that would deliver checkmate, but he has twenty-five moves that would allow stalemate!

Folie à deux

The Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc3 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+) is one of the "modern" Jerome Gambit lines where White obtains one pawn in exchange for his sacrificed piece.

In a recent game, after much ado, having gained nothing more and lost nothing more, I arrived at the following endgame position.


perrypawnpusher - OudeKwakkelaar, blitz, FICS, 2011

I had the delusional notion that the game could be draw by moving the White King to the Queenside and eliminating Black's pawns.

The funny thing was, my opponent had the same idea.

43.Kf5 Nd3 44.Ke6 Nc1 45.Kd6 Nxa2 46.Kc6 Nb4+ 47.Kb7 Nd3 48.Kxa7 Nc1 49.Kxb6 Nxb3 50.Kb5 Kh6

Black's King can not help on the Queenside until he takes care of the White h-pawn.

51.Ka4 Nd2 52.Kb5 Nb3 53.Ka4 Nd2 54.Kb5

I was happy with a repetition of position.

54...Ne4 55.Kc6 Kh5 56.Kd5 Nc3+ 57.Kxc5 Kh4 58.Kd6 Kxh3 59.c5 Nb5+ 60.Kd7 Kg4 61.c6 Kf5 62.c7 Nxc7

drawn, as neither player has mating material

But, wait a minute! Let's go back to Black's move 51 (or 53) and try 51...Nd4 instead:

 
analysis diagram
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Now Black's Knight and pawn cooperate perfectly, and White's King can only race around foolishly, taking a stab at the pawn, then the Knight, then the pawn...
 
Eventually Black's King joins the dance and the game is over: 51...Nd4 52.Ka5 (going after the pawn) Kh5 (Black has time to head toward the h-pawn) 53.Kb6 Nb3 54.Kc6 Kh4 55.Kb5 (might as well go after the Knight again) Kxh3 56.Ka4 Nd4 57.Ka5 (back to the pawn) Kg4 58.Kb6 Nb3 59.Kb5 Kf4 60.Ka4 (attacking the Knight) Nd4 61.Ka5 Ke5 62.Kb6 Nb3 63.Kb5 Kd4 64.Ka4 Kxc4. Black will simply escort his pawn to its Queening square.
 
The final irony is that while the leap of the Black Knight to d4 was a winner on move 51 and move 53, even if the second player had finally discovered the idea it would not be so on move 55: Black would need to play 54...Nb3, and that would allow 55.Ka4, repeating the position for the third time and allowing a draw, anyway...

Such things are bound to happen in blitz play.

Flounder

I have slowly been increasing the rating of the players I try the Jerome Gambit on, and this has had a marked impact on my games. While once I could play my "regular" game, and pounce on my opponent's big errors, now I have to try to make something out of much lesser errors... This will continually push me to improve my game, or more results like the following will occur.

perrypawnpusher - truuf
blitz, FICS, 2011

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

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Kf8

The Jerome Variation of the Jerome Gambit, played by Alonzo Wheeler Jerome against David Jaeger in correspondence, 1880.

7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qg3 Nf6

Pete Banks ("blackburne") faced 8...Qe7 over-the-board in Banks -Dunne, Worcestershire vs Derbyshire, 2010, (1-0,35);


Bill Wall has seen both 8...Qf6 (Wall,B - GoldCoinCollector, Chess.com, 2010 [1-0,17]) and 8...h5 (Wall,B -Thieveyen, Chess.com, 2010 [1-0,61]).

9.Nc3

A tiny bit better might be 9.d3, although transposition is likely.

9...Kf7 10.d3 Rf8 11.0-0 Kg8

Black has castled-by-hand and is simply better. His Bishop at c5 holds back the f-pawn, causing a change in White's strategy.

12.Bg5 Nh5

Better was 12...Be6, but who can resist attacking the Queen? 

13.Qh4 Qe8 14.Nd5 Qf7

15.c3 Be6

A reasonable move, but it has a tactical hole, so better was 15...h6.

16.Ne3

Missing a chance to grab a pawn with 16.Nxc7 Qxc7 17.Qxh5 and allowing Black to correct his last move.
16...h6 17.Bxh6 gxh6 18.g4

From here on out, my moves become more and more desperate. 

18...Qg6

An inaccuracy, although giving back a piece (he has two to spare) to exchange Queens pretty much seals my fate.

19.Qxh5 Qxh5 20.gxh5 Bh3 21.Rfe1 Kh7 22.Kh1 Rxf2 23.d4 Bb6 24.Rab1 Raf8

25.a4 R8f3 26.b4 a6 27.a5 Ba7 28.Rbc1 Rd2 29.Nd1 c5 30.dxc5 dxc5 31.e5 cxb4 32.e6 Bg2 checkmate

It is worth checking out the game references, above (all are in The Database), but this outing was not one of my better ones.