Mysteries of the Jerome Pawns

I wish that I had won the following game because I solved the "mysteries" of the "Jerome pawns" discussed after move 20. Alas, I took advantage of my opponent's mistake and slid into a drawn endgame, feeling lucky... 

perrypawnpusher - chingching
blitz, FICS, 2011

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

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+

According to The Database, which I consulted after the game, up until now, chingching was 9-1 against the Jerome Gambit. However, every one of those games saw 5.d4 instead of 5.Nxe5+, so my move was going to at least give my opponent something new to look at. 

I was interested to see that chingching had also played 16 games (scoring 75%) defending an Italian Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d4, which transposed to the Jerome with 4...exd4 5.Bxf7+ (an idea as old as Wright - Hunn, Arkansas, 1874). Among the Jerome Gambit Gemeinde, DragonTail is the top practitioner of this line, and we have previously seen DragonTail - chingching, blitz, FICS, 2009.

5...Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6

7.Qd5+ Ke8 8.Qxc5 Qe7 9.Qe3 d6

10.0-0 Nf6 11.Nc3 Rf8 12.f4 Kf7

Continuing to castle-by-hand. Instead, 12...Ng4, as in perrypawnpusher - MRBarupal, blitz, FICS, 2010 (0-1, 31) is not as strong.

13.f5 Ne5 14.d4 Neg4

As often happens, it is tempting to harass the White Queen. I suppose this is because White's opening seems so artificial that certain allowances can be made in how Black responds. Still, 14...Nc6 was for choice, as White can now develop some initiative.

15.Qe2 Kg8 16.h3 Nh6 17.Bxh6 gxh6 18.e5 dxe5 19.dxe5

19...Qc5+ 20.Kh1 Nd5

This is a critical position for the game, as Rybka 3, in the post mortem, saw Black's last move as a blunder (recommending 20...Ne8 instead).

The point is that the "Jerome pawns", now connected and passed, work very well with White's heavy pieces after  21.Nxd5 Qxd5 22.Rad1

analysis diagram






See?

I admit that I still did not, and it took some work to see why Rybka saw White as more than a piece better.

For starters, White is threatening e5-e6 and f5-f6 which combine with Qg4+ in a mating attack. That suggests that Black's best retreat for his Queen will be 22...Qf7, even though that still allows White to play 23.e6.

If Black uses his Queen to blockade the forward pawn with 23...Qe7, then 24.Qe5 will force 24...Bxe6 25.fxe6.

If Black uses his Queen to blockade the trailing pawn with 23...Qf6, then White has a tricky combination: 24.e7 Re8 25.Rd8!? when 25...Rxd8 is met with 26.Qc4+ and Black has to either give up his Bishop with 26...Be6 or face the other advancing Jerome pawn with 26...Kf7 27.exd8/Q Qxd8 28.f6+ Kf8 29.Qc5+ Qd8 30.Qe3 Be6 31.Qxh6+ Ke8 32.Qxh7 Qf8 33.Re1 Qxf6 34.Qg8+ Qxa8 when White is up the exchange and two pawns.

Wow. That is so far over my head...

21.Qh5 Nxc3 22.bxc3 Qxe5 23.Rae1 Qf6

White's position is only a shadow of what it was 3 moves ago. His Kingside "attack" is also doomed to failure.

24.Re3 Bxf5 25.Ref3 Qe6

An odd slip by opponent, dropping a piece, when 25...Qg6, instead, would have sealed his advantage.

26.Rxf5 Rxf5 27.Qxf5 Qxf5 28.Rxf5 Rd8

We have reached a drawish looking endgame.

29.Rb5 Rd2 30.Rxb7 Rxc2 31.Rxa7 Rxc3 32.a4 Rc1+ 33.Kh2 Ra1 34.Rxc7 Rxa4 35.Rd7 Ra2 36.Re7 Game drawn by mutual agreement

Did he jump, or was he pushed?

My guess is that the first chessplayer to follow 1.e4 with Bc4 (either right away, as in the Bishop's Opening, or later, as in the Italian Game or the King's Gambit) already had the move Bxf7+ in mind. That seminal moment would have been long before the birth of the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) – and who knows which of those early attacks might have inspired Alonzo Wheeler Jerome to create his "Double Gambit"?

In the following game, Jerome Gambit Gemeinde member blackburne is playing the venerable King's Gambit Accepted, until the game takes a Bxf7+ swerve. Was blackburne's hand forced by the ghost of Lolli, Salvio, or Muzio, or of A.W. Jerome himself?

blackburne - notverydeepblue
ChessWorld, 2011

1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 a6

I have found only 3 or 4 game examples of this move, all from amateur play. Black is either experimenting wildly, or he is essaying the weak psychological gambit: do you know your opening as White well enough to play it without any help from me??

Either way, knowing blackburne, this signals a short game.

4.Bc4 b5 5.Bxf7+

Of course, there was nothing preventing White from playing 5.Bb3 followed by 6.d4, instead – except, perhaps, his sense of adventure.

5...Kxf7 6.Ne5+ Ke6 7.d4

Does any reader care to wager that the next time blackburne reaches this position, he will offer a further piece with 7.O-O ?

7...c6 8.Qg4+ Kd6 9.Nf7+ Black resigned

Slaughter

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

A Puzzle

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."

Waiting... Pouncing!

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

Sunday Book Review: Correspondence Chess in Britain and Ireland, 1824-1987

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.

A skunk, by any other name...

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".)