Waiting

I enjoy playing over the games of axykk (see "La la la la la...", "Say, what...?" and "Making It"), a player at FICS apparently new to the Jerome Gambit. He shows a lot of cool patience while playing down material, waiting for an opportunity for success to come his way. (With a little more endgame knowledge, his opponent could have foiled his plans.)

axykk - ElFuriozo
blitz, FICS, 2011

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

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

7.Qxe5 Qe7 8.Qxe7+

Confidently going into the Queenless middlegame.

8...Nxe7 9.d3 d6 10.Be3 Bxe3 11.fxe3 g6

Black really hasn't done anything wrong yet, and still holds the extra piece for White's two (doubled) "Jerome pawns".

As far as White is concerned, the game is barely started.

12.0-0+ Kg7 13.Nd2 Be6 14.Nf3 Rhf8 15.Nd4 Rxf1+ 16.Rxf1 Bd7

17.Rf4 a6 18.c4 Nc6 19.Nxc6 bxc6 20.Kf1 Rb8 21.b3 a5

The game continues. White simply "plays chess" and waits for the "time bomb" (inevitiable blunder) to go off in his opponent's camp.

22.Rf2 Be6 23.Ke2 d5 24.exd5 cxd5 25.cxd5 Bxd5 26.e4 Be6

White's pawns are looking healthier, and one of them is protected and passed.

27.d4 c6 28.Kd3 a4 29.bxa4 Ra8 30.Rc2 Rxa4 31.Rxc6 Ra3+ 32.Ke2 Bg4+ 33.Kf2 Rxa2+ 34.Kg3 h5

The game is beginning to look even, with White's "Jerome pawn" passers balancing out Black's Bishop; but, as the game shows, the first player has practical winning chances.

35.h3 Ra3+ 36.Kf4 Be2 37.Rc7+ Kf6 38.h4 Ra6 39.e5+ Ke6 40.Ke4 Ra4 41.Rg7 Bg4 42.Rxg6+ Kf7 43.Rf6+ Ke7 44.Rh6 Ra2

45.Rh7+ Kf8 46.g3 Rg2 47.d5 Rxg3 48.e6

Now it is time for Black to return the Bishop and secure the draw with 48...Bxe6 49.dxe6 Rg4+ 50.Kf5 Rxh4. White will be unable to deal both with the checks to his King and Black's h-pawn at the same time; he will need to split the point.

48...Rf3 49.d6

All is not lost yet for Black. If he exchanges Rooks now, he can still sacrifice his Bishop and then take advantage of the unique defensive chance given to those who fight against a Rook pawn.

Thus, 49...Bf5+ 50.Kxf3 Bxh7 would accomplish the first step, and after 51.Kf4, then 51...Bg8 52.Ke5 Bxe6 53.Kxe6 Ke8 would accomplish the second.

White would then discover, to his dismay, that, abandoning his d-pawn to use as a distraction while he goes to free up his h-pawn, is not enough: 54.Kf6 Kd7 55.Kg5 Kxd6 56.Kxh5 Ke7 57.Kg6 Kf8 58.h5 Kg8 and Black's King will get to h8 to stop the pawn. 

If, instead, White decides to hold onto his d-pawn with 55.Ke5 (instead of 55.Kg5) and not run to the Kingside, Black can cooly play 55...Kd8, staying in front of the passer. It looks then like White has gained something, as his King can now beat the enemy King to the defensive square h8, but this, still, is not enough to win, as there is another oddity related to the h-pawn. Thus: 56.Kf6 Kd7 57.Kg6 Kxd6 58.Kxh5 Ke7 59.Kg6 Kf8 60.Kh7 ("Ha!") Kf7 ("Ha! Ha!") and White's King, himself, is in the way of his advancing pawn. If it moves out of the way, Black's King moves in to defend. If White only moves his pawn, Black will tempo his King back and forth from f7 to f8, and stalemate will be reached.

49... Rf6

Alas, this will not do.

50.e7+ Ke8 and Black resigned.
 

Refutation right on the spot

I have always been impressed by stories of Grandmasters who, upon being confronted by a new or surprising idea in the opening, think hard and come up with a refutation right on the spot.

In club play, you may find the right idea, and not even realize it until it is too late. If then.

perrypawnpusher - KnightIsHorse
blitz, FICS, 2011

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nc6 4.Bc4 Bc5

The Italian Four Knights Game, about to become the Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit.

5.Bxf7+ Kxf7 6.Nxe5+ Nxe5 7.d4

7...Bb4

This defense can work for Black, but he needs to give some thought as to what his plan will be.

8.dxe5 Bxc3+ 9.bxc3

Now, retreating the Knight, or even letting it expire on f6 with 9...Re8 10.exf6 Rxe4+ 11.Be3 Qxf6, keeps an edge for Black. 

9...Nxe4 10.Qd5+

Black resigned

It was possible to continue, as in my most recent example, perrypawnpusher - Aerandir, blitz, FICS, 2011, but I suspect that KnightIsHorse was discouraged by the turn of events.

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!