This is another one of those interesting losses alluded to in "Three Years Running". Black's defense has an eerie "hypermodern" feel to it, but it should not have slaughtered me like it did. This is a good game to learn from.
perrypawnpusher - LuigiJerk
blitz, FICS, 2011
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6
7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 Nf7
Sometimes this Knight move both takes the steed out of danger and provides for the defense of the Black King. In this game, that is exactly what it does, but it should not have.
Yet, the position is not simple. Not even ten moves in, and the Jerome Gambit still has its secrets!
White should now take the Knight with 9.Qxf7, threatening to next to take the Bishop after Qd5+.
Black has a tricky counter-attack with 9...Nf6, covering the d5 square. This seems to give away another piece after 10.e5+ Kc6, but pay attention to White's uncastled King: it is unsafe to now grab material and open both the e- and g-files. White's best is 11.d4, instead, when 11...Bxd4 can be answered with 12.Qc4+ Bc5 12.b4. If Black tries 11...Ne4 instead, White can retreat his Queen with 12.Qb3 or try 12.c4, answering 12...d5 with 13.Qxd5+ Qxd5 14.cxd5 Kxd5 15.dxc5 Nxc5.
Black can also defend d5 with 9...c6, when 10.Qxg7 Nf6 11.Qxf6 Qxf6 12.e5+ Qxe5 13.fxe5+ Kxe5 leads, as with 9...Nf6, to an edge for White.
All of this I learned after the game, with the help of Rybka 3 and Fritz 8.
9.Qd5+ Ke7 10.Qxc5+ d6
The alternative, 10...Ke8, was seen in perrypawnpusher - calexander, blitz, FICS, 2009 (1-0, 25). (Yes, I missed taking the Knight on f7 there, too.)
11.Qe3 Be6
Here Black has an edge. His Knight on f7 slightly out-weighs my two "Jerome pawns".
12.f5 Bd7 13.d4 Nf6 14.e5 dxe5 15.dxe5 Nd5
After 15...Ng4 the game would be tactically tricky, but roughly balanced. (I don't think I'll ever criticize myself for castling "too early" in a Jerome Gambit again.)
16.Qa3+
A strange move. Simply 16.Qc5+ allows White to win the Knight at d5.
16...Ke8
While a superficial look (like the kind that I took) shows that White is on the edge of forking two pieces with his e-pawn, anything deeper shows the first player's King at great risk.
White needs to castle here.
17.e6 Qh4+ 18.Kf1
Going the wrong way, but after 18.Kd1 Bc6 19.exf7+ Kxf7 White's extra pawn would mean nothing, while his insecure King and undeveloped pieces would give Black the advantage.
Quite a lesson about King safety for the Jerome Gambiteer!
18...Bb5+ White resigned
Sometimes my games end with a puzzle, leaving me to wonder what has happened. Often, this is because of what has gone on in the game. However, in the following contest I had to wonder what had gone on outside the game.
perrypawnpusher - transilvania
blitz, FICS, 2011
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6
The Semi-Italian Opening.
4.0-0 Nf6 5.Nc3 Bc5
The Semi-Italian Four Knights Game.
6.Bxf7+
The Semi-Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit.
6...Kxf7 7.Nxe5+ Nxe5 8.d4 Bxd4 9.Qxd4 Nc6 10.Qc4+
The correct response to the attack on the Queen.
I have won two games with 10.Qd3, perrypawnpusher - LeChinois, blitz, FICS, 2011 (1-0, 15)) and perrypawnpusher - javipangea, blitz, FICS, 2011 (1-0, 19), nonetheless.
10...Kf8
Correct, again, although I have lost two games to 10...Kg6, perrypawnpusher - mjmonday, blitz, FICS, 2010 (0-1, 26) and perrypawnpusher - DeDaapse, blitz, FICS, 2010 (0-1, 19).
Go figure.
11.f4 d6 12.Be3
Here, Black stands well.
However, with over 5 minutes left on his clock, he let them all run our and forfeited on time.
I hope nothing bad happened. Perhaps, as they say, he "had bigger fish to fry."
I just got an email (and a Jerome Gambit game) from Bill Wall, in response to my post "Like the Big Boys".
Here is the game, with notes by Bill.
Wall,B - NFNZ
FICS, 2011
I liked the way you described my games as waiting, waiting, waiting, pouncing. This game demonstrates the waiting and the pouncing. You will like the way I got out of a pin of my queen and king. I never made this maneuver before. Then I pounced for mate.
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nc6
4.Bc4
Waiting...
4...Bc5
Yes!
5.Bxf7+
5...Kxf7 6.Qe2
Waiting...
6...Rf8?
Yes
7.Qc4+
Small pounce
7...d5 8.Qxc5 d4 9.Nb5
Waiting...
9...Nxe4 10.Nxe5+ Nxe5 11.Qxe5
Waiting
11...Ng3
Did I make a mistake?
12.fxg3
Waiting...
12...Re8
Looks bad.
13.O-O+!
Big pounce
13...Kg8 14.Qxc7
Waiting
14...Qg5
14...Qxc7 15.Nxc7 forks the two rooks
15.Qf7+!
Final fatal pounce.
Black resigns as 15...Kh8 16.Qxe8 is mate
For many chess players, correspondence chess has been a kind of "secret weapon". With more time to consider, analyze, and make each move in a long distance game, new openings (some quite unorthodox, if that is where the interest runs) could be explored and prepared for over-the-board use. One need look no further than Alonzo Wheeler Jerome testing out his Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) in correspondence play, for a relevant example.
In addition, correspondence games, themselves, seem to have been excluded by and large from collections of over-the-board play. Many club players, masters and grandmasters prepared for their encounters largely untouched by this gold mine of "slower" chess.
A player who subscribed to the Chess Mail correspondence chess magazine, however, or who obtained the MegaCorr and UltraCorr CD databases, had access to hundreds of thousands (ultimately, over a million) additional games.
Both Chess Mail and Mega/UltraCorr were edited by Senior International Master of Correspondence Chess, Tim Harding, who is the author of today's reviewed book.
Correspondence Chess in Britain and Ireland, 1824 – 1987
Tim Harding
McFarland and Co., 2011
softcover, algebraic notation
439 pages
This book is a massive work, a history, a games collection, an historical record — one likely to make it to many players' "desert island" book list.
In the words of the author
This is the story of a bygone age in intellectual sport, which ended in the latter part of the twentieth century. It tells the history of correspondence chess in Britain and Ireland from the first formal match between Edinburgh and London in 1824 up to the 1980s. This span of time saw a social transformation and an explosion in leisure activities including chess. Correspondence chess is that fascinating branch of the game where moves are exchanged with distant opponents by post or other means of communication. Nowadays it is mostly played on the internet, using email and web servers, but in the 1820s the mails were carried by stagecoach and the cost of sending letters was beyond the purse of a working man. In 1840, British postage charges were drastically reduced and postal chess became a novelty, which developed into a global competitive sport.
This book is aimed at all chess-players with an interest in the history of their game, not just postal chess, including as it does, for example, new revelation about the controversial Victorian master Howard Staunton (1810 – 1874). It should also interest social cultural and sports historians who may only have a passing acquaintance with chess. The story begins with the match which set the pattern for the rules of correspondence chess ever since.
Deeply researched and documented (its core was the author's doctoral thesis) Correspondence Chess in Britain and Ireland, 1824-1987 is also very accessible, both in readability and content. Harding has always known what will catch the eye of the average chess reader, and this title shows off his ability to tell a tale well.
Here is a peek at the Table of Contents
Preface and Acknowledgments
Abbreviations
Annotation Symbols
1. Capital Letters: Edinburgh versus London, 1824–1828
2. Heyday of the Inter-Club Matches
3. Penny Post and Private Matches
4. Moves Over the Wires: Chess Adopts Technology
5. The Earliest Postal Tournaments, 1853 to 1870
6. Changing Times: The 1870s and 1880s
7. “A Battle at Long Range”: The United Kingdom versus the United States, 1877–1881
8. The Growth of Tournaments, 1870 to 1897
9. Scottish Correspondence Chess to 1918
10. Irish and Welsh Correspondence Chess to 1918
11. The English Scene, 1890 to 1918
12. From One War to the Next, 1918 to 1939
13. Correspondence Chess During World War II
14. International Revival, 1946 to 1951
15. Domestic Competitions, 1946 to 1970
16. Crisis and Resolution: Britain and the International
Correspondence Chess Federation, 1951 to 1971
17. The Home Front: The 1970s and 1980s
18. Growth and Success, 1972 to 1982
19. Becoming World Champions
Appendix I. Matches Between Clubs
Appendix II. Lists of Champions
Appendix III. Excerpts from Rules and Other Documents
Appendix IV. British and Irish Holders of I.C.C.F. Titles
Chapter Notes
Select Bibliography
Index of Images
Index of Opponents
Index of Openings by Name
Index of Openings by ECO Code
General Index
Whether you are looking for a slice of history (chess and otherwise), a measure of enjoyable chess games, an insight into openings that you play (or would like to play), or just a way to pleasantly while away a few hours at a time, Correspondence Chess in Britain and Ireland, 1824-1987 is a cornucopia of delight, waiting to be sampled.
It was the star-crossed lover Romeo who opined
What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet.
I chose that reference to reflect the game below, which contains a mis-named line, as well as a choice of moves by me that has the aroma more of a polecat than a fragrant flower...
perrypawnpusher - igormsp
blitz, FICS, 2011
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 Nf3+
I checked, and this line is given the name the "Young variation" in the Nomenclature that Bill Wall put together for this blog, after Jack Young, the amazing opening inventor of "Bozo's Chess Emporium" fame.
I think I may have misled Bill in the information that I gave him about the line. Young actually faced the move at the "hands" of the Chess Challenger 10 computer in 1979. That might make it look like the "Challenger Variation," but I think that the name more likely should be the "Norton Variation", after the early Jerome Gambit game Jerome - Norton, correspondence, 1876 (0-1, 42).
My error.
However, the move, itself, is not an error. In fact, it is a great way to set a complacent Jerome Gambit player back on his heels.
9.Kf1
While playing the game, I remembered that the main line goes 9.gxf3 Qh4+ 10.Kd1 Qf2 and that I had quickly reached a drawn position in my game against Sir Osis of the Liver in our 2008 ChessWorld game (winning, when he over-reached).
I didn't remember much more.
More critical was 10...Ne7, from the game perrypawnpusher - sjeijk, blitz, FICS, 2011, (1-0, 19) but I was a little fuzzy on the details there, too.
So, hoping to "surprise" my apparently prepared opponent, I opted for Alonzo Wheeler Jerome's choice of moves against D. P. Norton.
Bad idea: the strategy, and the choice of moves.
9...Kc6
Okay.
There are many reasons that the Jerome Gambit will not be mistaken for, say, the Ruy Lopez, starting with the fact that most of the first 10 moves in the Spanish Game have already been mapped out.
My opponent took enough time in choosing his move for me to believe that I had surprised him. His choice, to leave his Knight en prise and tip-toe his King away from the center, is enough for a draw, similar to the Sir Osis game.
10.Qd5+ Kb6 11.Qb3+ Kc6 12.Qxf3
I could have split the point with 12.Qd5+, etc, but I thought that I would see if I could further confuse my opponent. I was betting on my "Jerome pawns" versus his extra piece, but my poor development seriously hampered my attacking possibilities and actually gave Black the better game.
After the game, Rybka 3 suggested that 12.Nc3 a6 13.d4 was the way for White to fight for a possible, slight, edge. Wow.
12...Qf6
I am sure that the poor Queen has been dying to move since Black played 8...Nf3+ instead of 8...Qh4+. Now, however, it will just be dying.
13.e5+ Black resigned
(See, I wasn't being "modest" when I referred to my recent "lucky wins" in "Three Years Running".)
Here is a recent, light, quick game from MrJoker, at the Internet Chess Club. His opponent must have felt like he had been run over by a truck. Did anyone get the license plate number?
MrJoker - enelec,
blitz 2 12, Internet Chess Club, 2011
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bb4
In all fairness, it is hard to tell if this move is an ultra-modern refinement of the double King pawn opening, or a mouse-slip. (Semyon Alapin used to play 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Bb4 in the Spanish Game.)
I faced a similar idea (after 3...a6 4.0-0) in my game against dabbling. Actually, MrJoker faced the same move a week earlier; see below.
4.c3 Ba5 5.Bxf7+
Giving the opening the Jerome treatment.
5...Kxf7 6.Nxe5+ Nxe5 7.Qh5+ Ke6
Or 7...Ng6 8.Qd5+ Ke8 9.Qxa5 Qe7 10.d3 Nf6 11.0-0 b6 12.Qg5 d6 13.f4 Bd7 14.Nd2 Bb5 15.c4 Bc6 16.b3 a5 17.Ba3 Qf7 18.f5 Ne5 19.d4 h6 20.Qh4 Neg4 21.Rae1 Kd7 22.h3 h5 23.hxg4 hxg4 24.Qg3 Rh6 25.Kf2 Nh5 26.Qxg4 Rf8 27.d5 Bb7 28.Ke3 Kc8 29.f6+ Kb8 30.fxg7 Nf6 31.gxf8Q+ Qxf8 32.Qg5 Qh8 33.Rxf6 Rxf6 34.Bb2 Rg6 35.Bxh8 Rxg5 36.Re2 Rg3+ 37.Nf3 c6 38.Kf4 Rg8 39.Bd4 c5 40.Bc3 Bc8 41.e5 Rg4+ 42.Ke3 dxe5 43.Nxe5 Rg3+ 44.Nf3 Bg4 45.Be5+ Kc8 46.Bxg3 Black resigned, MrJoker - WhiteKnight-1, blitz 2 12, ICC, 2011.
8.Qf5+ Kd6 9.d4 Qf6
Normally, a reliable defensive idea. But not today.
10.dxe5+ Qxe5 11.Bf4 Black resigned
I believe that it was GM Andy Soltis, long ago, who wrote that it can be difficult to decide, when there is a choice of either Rook to move to a square, which one to choose. He even humoursly suggested that, regardless of which one the player chooses, the annotator would be able to to kibitz "Wrong Rook".
That assessment is at the heart of this game (even though, here, it is a matter of choosing which of two Rooks should be moved, each to a different square), but it probably should be written "WRONG ROOK!" and placed against the background of a ticking clock...
perrypawnpusher - pitrisko
blitz, FICS, 2011
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6
7.Qd5+ Ke8 8.Qxc5 d6 9.Qe3 Qf6
In a game that we played 3 days earlier (see "Like the Big Boys"), my opponent had tried the very reasonable 9...Nf6.
10.Nc3
I've played a couple of games with 10.0-0; see perrypawnpusher - TJPOT, blitz, FICS, 2009 (1-0, 48) and perrypawnpusher - LeiCar, blitz, FICS, 2010 (1-0, 25).
Louis Morin ("mrjoker") has played a couple with 10.d4; see guest2199 - guest401, ICC, 2004 (1-0, 87) and mrjoker - Igor77, ICC, 2008 (1-0, 70).
10...c6 11.0-0 N8e7 12.f4 Rf8
This is Black's idea: with the King Knight on e7, he can double the heavy pieces on the f-file. He will have four pieces trained on the f5 square.
13.f5 Ne5 14.d4 Nc4 15.Qd3 b5
I've seen similar Knight vs Queen face-offs, for example perrypawnpusher - saltos, blitz, FICS, 2009 (1-0, 28).
16.b3 Nb6 17.Bb2
I liked this move, both kicking the enemy Knight and preparing to put my Bishop on the long diagonal.
Yet, Rybka 3, after the game, preferred the same move that I've been wrestling with, in different settings, recently (see "What does the Jerome Gambit deserve?" and "Like the Big Boys"): 17.e5
The main idea is the clearance sacrifice, 17...dxe5 18.Ne4. The secondary idea is that if Black advances his Queen, instead, with 17...Qh4, White will advance his pawn with 18.f6. There is also the ugly 17...Bxf5 18.exf6 Bxf6 19.cxd3 Rxf6 20.Rxf6 gxf6 Ne4 where White will have an edge in the endgame.
I guess when I better understand e4-e5, I'll have a better handle on the Jerome Gambit.
17...Kf7
It's never to late to castle-by-hand.
18.Ne2 Nd7 19.Rae1 a5 20.Nf4 Kg8
Things seem to be going as planned: I have plenty of development as compensation for my sacrifice, I am about to drop a knight into an outpost at e6, and my opponent is running short of time.
21.Ne6 Rf7 22.e5
Give yourself credit if you saw the Bishop-and-Knight-tour: 22.Bc1 h6 23.Nc7 Ra7 24.Ne8 Qh4 25.Nxd6 winning a pawn.
22...dxe5
pitrisko's time was running out, so he overlooked the better 22...Qh4, which left White with only a small edge.
23.dxe5 Qh4 24.Rf4
All together now: WRONG ROOK!
Of course, after 24.Re4, Black's Queen is in danger of being trapped, and his best move, 24...Qh5, allows 25.Nf4 followed by 26.e6.
What a sad way to mess up a relatively well-played game by White!
24...Qxe1+ 25.Rf1 Qh4 26.Nc7 Nxf5 27.Nxa8 Nc5 28.Qc3
Here, much to my relief, Black forfeited on time.
Another example of the equalizing injustice of chess.
