I have treated the entry of the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxc7+) into the pages of the opening "encyclopedias" of its day (see "Jerome Gambit: Early Opening Tomes" Part 1 and Part 2) as a good thing. Certainly, the exposure of the gambit to a greater number of chess players was a positive turn.
Was the opening, however, refined as it passed from one analytical session to the other? Were the best defenses identified and polished? Were White's chances, as thin as they are, clearly identified?
In a word, "no."
Newer books largely copied what was in the older books and passed it along. Critical analysis was almost nonexistent.
True, some authors vied with each other for different ways to say "this opening is no good, but Black must stay awake and do his best or he could embarass himself", but that was about as forward as chess knowledge marched, at least concerning the Jerome Gambit...
I will return to these opening works, but for now, Dear Readers, a break from all this seriousness.
I have been using the line 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.d4 Bxd4 9.Na3 as the guide for a travelogue around the Jerome Gambit world.
It is worth staying "home" today, to look at Alonzo Wheeler Jerome's analysis, and then examine what Lt. Sorensen did with it.
After 8.d4 Bxd4 9.Na3 two of the three defenses that Jerome presented in his Dubuque Chess Journal article, 9…Ke7 and 9...Ne7 were given as sufficient for Black’s advantage, as they left the second player two pieces up.
Certainly 9...Ke7 10.Qh3 d6 11.Qh4+ Ke8 12.Bg5 Nf6 13.0–0–0 Bb6 14.f4 Ng6 15.Qg3 Nh5 16.Qf3 Qd7 17.f5 Nf6 18.fxg6, as Jerome gave, is not at all promising for White, and 15...h6 instead would have made his prospects even more dismal.
Still, when it was Sorensen's turn, he ignored 9...Ke7.
As for 9...Ne7, Jerome's main line, 10.Qh3 Qf8 11.0–0 Kc6 12.Nb5 Kxb5 13.Qb3+ Kc6 14.Bg5, it looks equally uncomfortable for White.
Sorensen repaired the second line for White by replacing Jerome’s 11.O-O with the consistent 11.Nb5+ which brings danger to Black’s King: 11...Kc5 12.Nxd4 Kxd4 13.Bg5. There are several corrections needed here, though.
First, 13.Qe3+ (not 13.Bg5) is the winning move, leading to mate. The text is an error, as it lets Black find 13...Nf3+, returning a piece to either allow the exhange of Queens or, after 14.gxf3 Kc5, block the White Queen and permit the Black King to escape.
Second, 10...c6 (instead of Jerome's 10...Qf8) stops the White Knight's troublesome leap (Sorensen's 11.Nb5+), showing that 9...Ne7 is good for Black, after all.
The third defense that Jerome gave, 9…Qf6, led to White’s advantage, in his opinion, after 10.Nb5+ Kc5 11.Nxd4 Kd6 12.Nb5+ Kc5 13.Qh3 Kxb5 14.Qb3+. However, this line, too, is a mess.
The position is even after White's 14th move, as he is forcing a draw by repetition.
On his 13th move, Black can show an advantage by playing 13...Nf3+, with ideas similar to the same defensive move in the 9...Ne7 defense.
The big problem for Black in the analysis, as we have seen (i.e. Jerome - Norton, correspondence, 1877) is his 11...Kd6 (instead of Norton's much stronger 11...d6). Jerome gives as a secondary line 11...Qxf5, but it also falls short of the strength of 11...d6.
Sorensen simply copied Jerome’s 9...Qf6 line, giving 10.Nb5+ Kc5 11.Nxd4 Qxf5 12.Nxf5 g6 13.Be3+ Kc6 14.Nd4+ Kd6 15.O-O-O Ke7 16.Nb5 and said “White has the best position” – but this would not be the case after the correct 13…Kb5; or after 12...d6 or 11...d6.
While Lt. Sorensen's article (see "Early Opening Tomes: Addendum") was making its rounds, Alonzo Wheeler Jerome was learning more about the line that we have been pursuing (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.d4 Bxd4 9.Na3), and about the dangers of having one's published analysis available for others to crack – as can be learned from the November 24, 1877 issue of News of the Week, that carried a Jerome Gambit correspondence game.
That game can already be found, thanks to Dr. Tim Harding, in "The Jerome - Norton Games (Part 4)", to which can be added the following notes:
Jerome,A - Norton,D
correspondence, 1877
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6
7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.d4 Bxd4 9.Na3
9...Qf6 10.Nb5+ Kc5 11.Nxd4 d6
Instead of Norton's 11...d6 in this game, Jerome's analysis in the Dubuque Chess Journal gave both 11...Qxf5 and 11...Kd6.
Филидор1792's recent game showed 11...Kxe4 to be playable, but very dangerous for Black.
As the News of the Week commentator pointed out, "This move decides the game. White reels from the shock, is henceforth pressed to the wall, and Black has an easy victory."
12.Nb3+ Kb6 13.Qg5 Qxg5 14.Bxg5 Nf6 15.f3 Be6 16.Nd4 Rhe8 17.0-0 c5 18.Nb3 Bxb3 19.cxb3 a5 20.Rfd1 Kc6 21.a4 b6 22.Rd2 Rad8 23.h3 Nf7 24.Bh4 g5 25.Bf2 d5 26.Rad1 dxe4 27.Rxd8 Rxd8 28.Re1 Re8 29.fxe4 Rxe4 30.Rf1 Re6 31.Be3 h6 32.g4 Ne5 33.Bd2 Ne4 34.Bc3 Nxc3 35.bxc3 c4 36.bxc4 Kc5 37.Rb1 Kxc4 38.Rb5 Kxc3 39.Kg2 Nd3 40.h4 gxh4 41.Kh3 Nc5 Black resigned
Gathering in all that we have covered in the last week and a half on the Jerome Gambit line 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.d4 Bxd4 9.Na3 – see "An Intriguing Letter" Parts 1, 2 and 3; "Some History of the Jerome Gambit" Parts 1, 2 and 3; and "Jerome Gambit: Early Opening Tomes" Parts 1 and 2 – we see that Alonzo Wheeler Jerome considered 3 responses in his analysis: 9...Ne7, 9...Qf6 and 9...Ke7.
It is time to pause and make an important addition – not from an opening tome, but from a chess magazine.
There was one singular event after Jerome's Dubuque Chess Journal articles were published that gave the gambit incredible exposure, and carried its analysis to those who would later include the attack in their opening books.
The editor of the Dubuque Chess Journal was in the habit of exchanging issues with different chess magazines around the world, and this led to the publication, in the May 1877 issue of Nordisk Skaktidende, a Danish chess magazine, of Lt. Sorensen's column "Skaktheori for Segyndere" ("Chess Theory for Beginners") covering the Jerome Gambit.
The article was translated into (at least) English, Spanish, French and Italian and appeared in chess magazines around the world.
Here is the article, from the English translation in The Chess Player's Chronicle of August 1, 1877 (I have substituted algebraic notation for descriptive.)
Chess Theory for Beginners
by Lieut. Sorensen
(translated from the Nordick Tidende for May.)
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5
With this answering move of the Bishop we have the fundamental position for that good old game which the Italians, hundreds of years ago, when they were masters of the Chess board, called "Giuoco Piano," even game, but the later age, for generality of explanation, the "Italian game." On this basis the usual continuation is 4.c3, whereby the d-pawn at the next move threatens to advance, and the White middle Pawns to occupy the centre.
In the next articles we will make mention of that regular fight for the maintenance or destruction of the centre, which is the essential point of the Italian game; in this, on the contrary, we will occupy ourselves with a Bashi-Bazouk attack, over which the learned Italians would have crossed themselves had they known it came under the idea of piano, but which is in reality of very recent date – 1874, and takes it origin from an American, A.W. Jerome.
It consists in the sacrifice of a piece by 4.Bxf7+.
Naturally we immediately remark that it is unsound, and that Black must obtain the advantage; but the attack is pretty sharp, and Black must take exact care, if he does not wish to go quickly to the dogs. A little analysis of it will, therefore, be highly instructive, not to say necessary, for less practised players, and will be in its right place in our Theory, especially since it is not found in any handbook.
The Americans call the game "Jerome's double opening," an allusion, probably, to the fresh sacrifice of a piece which follows at the next move, but we shall prefer to use the short and sufficiently clear designation, Jerome Gambit.
4.Bxf7+ Kxf7
That the King must take is evident, otherwise the Bishop without any hindrance can retire with his booty.
5.Nxe5+
Once must confess that this is a forcible invention, and difficulties begin now already for Black. There is clearly a choice between two things; between taking, and so maintaining further the preponderance of two pieces, or going with the King, for example, to f8, and being content with the one piece, which, however, has cost two pawns. We will treat these contingencies separately under First and Second Defence.
First Defence
5...Nxe5
White's best move is now 6.d4 or 6.Qh5+. By the first move he wins back one piece quite easily, but when there follows 6...Bxd4, he only receives the scanty recompense of one pawn for the other; by the second move exposes himself to the evil of gaining no piece back, inasmuch as Black can protect himself by 6...Ke6.
According to our conviction, the check with the Queen gives the best chances, and we therefore carry out this, while we point out the result of 6.d4 in the Specimen Game No. 1.
6.Qh5+ Ke6
Black now essays to keep both the pieces, and this must, after the defence adopted, 5...Nxe5, be regarded as consequently the most correct. For if he prefers to interpose the Kt at g6, White plays 7.Qd5+ Ke8 8.Qxc5, and one of the pieces falls under far more unfavorable conditions than if the King had immediatley retreated on the 5th move (Second Defence).
In Specimen Game No. 2 we shall see unfolded some of the inconveniences which the move treated of, 6...Ng6, brings with it.
7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.d4
It is impossible to decide whether this attacking move is stronger than a multitude of others which offer themselves in this interesting position, and of which we expecially 8.f4 and 8.Na3, but it seems clear every case into what abysses Black is plunging.
8...Bxd4 9.Na3 c6
With this move Black escapes; under (a) and (b) are seen less favourable modes of play. (a) 9...Qf6 10.Nb5+ Kc5 11.Nxd4 Qxf5 12.Nxf5 g6 13.Be3+ Kc6 14.Nd4+ Kd6 15.0-0-0 Ke7 16.Nb5 and White has the best position; (b) 9...Ne7 10.Qh3 Qf8 11.Nb5+ Kc5 12.Nxd4 Kxd4 13.Bg5 and White must win.
10.c3 Qf6 11.cxd4 Qxf5 12.exf5 Nf7 13.Bf4+ Ke7
Black must now, though not completely out of danger, be able to make his superiority of a piece and a pawn prevail.
Second Defence
5...Kf8 (best)
Althought the first defence was not thus to be abandoned, we shall still recommend this as more solid, and easier to manage.
6.Nxc6 dxc6 (best)
If 6...bxc6 7.d4 follows, and the Bishop becomes shut out from the game. It is also here of importance to have the open Queen's file.
7.0-0 Nf6 8.Qf3
Upon 8.d4 follows 8...Bg4 9.Qe1 Kf7 and Black is completely extricated, and has the advantage.
8...Qd4 9.d3 Bg4 10.Qg3 Bd6 11.Bf4 g5
This move, which costs a pawn, is not absolutely necessary, but it promotes and energetic liberation of Black's game, which is important in such positions to have in view.
12.Bxd6+ cxd6 13.h3 Be6 14.Qxg5 Rg8 15.Qh6+ Ke7 16.Nc3
The best move to preserve the b-pawn, which is necessary.
16...Rg6 and Black's attack becomes irresistable.
Specimen Game No. 1
6.d4
See the remark upon this under First Defence
6...Bxd4 7.Qxd4 d6 8.0-0 Nf6 9.f4 c5
This move, and the development of the Queen's wing standing in connection with it, we cannot regard as right, at any rate not until all was in order on the King's side. 9...Nc6 eventually followed by ...Re8, would have been the proper continuation, and must have left few favourable chances remaining for White.
10.Qc3 Neg4 11.Nd2 b5 12.h3 h5
Black must now prepare to sacrifice a little, because he did not protect himself in time.
13.e5 (best).
To have taken immediately would not have been near so good; the situation now requires thoroughly attentive play.
13...b4 14.Qf3 Ba6 15.exf6 Bxf1 16.Qb7+
Here 16.hxg4 would also have been good; White, however, plays to drive Black into a mating position.
16...Kxf6 17.Ne4+ Kg6 18.f5+ Kxf5 19.hxg4+ Kg6
With any other move Black is mated in a few moves, or loses the Queen.
20.Ng5
To the sufficiently threatening move 20.Bg5 Black has a good reply in 20...Qb6.
20...Qe8 21.Bd2 (best) Rf8 22.gxh5+ Kxh5 23.Qxg7 Bxg2
In order to avoid the mate threatened in two moves by Qh7 and Qh3.
24.Qh7+ Kg4 25.Re1 and White wins.
Specimen Game No. 2
6...Ng6
See the note to Black's 6th move in First Defense. The reader is now requested to observe for himself the difficulties which we mentioned that this mode of play entails, as we can spare with the subjoined game no space for further notes.
7.Qd5+ Ke8 8.Qxc5 d6 9.Qc3 Nf6 10.d3 c6 11.0-0 Kd7 12.f4 Qb6+ 13.Kh1 Kc7 14.Qe1 Re8 15.b3 Nd5 16.Qg3 Nb4 17.Na3 Bd7 18.c3 Nxa2 19.f5 Ne5 20.d4 Qxb3 21.dxe5 dxe5 22.Rb1 Qxc3 23.Rf3 Qa5 24.Rfb3 b5 25.Rxb5 cxb5 26.Nxb5+ Kc8 27.Nd6+ Kc7 28.Rb7+ Kxd6 29.Qd3+ and White wins
In 1891, reflecting the chess world's ambivalence about the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+), G.H.D. Gossip's Chess Player's Vade Mecum and Pocket Guide to the Openings Gossip had analysis of the Jerome, while his Theory of Chess Openings did not. The Handbuch was silent as well.
By 1900 a reader could still find references, but they might be delegated to instruction for novices. Chess Openings for Beginners, by Edward Ernest Cunnington, for example, exhausts itself with "Here we may mention, with a caution, as being quite unsound, the Jerome Gambit." The following year, Cunnington's The Modern Chess Primer mentions the first 6 moves of the named gambit.
In 1902, William Cook's (of Synopsis) The Chess Player's Compendium had no mention of the Jerome Gambit. For that matter, neither did his 1906 The Evolution of the Chess Openings.
Perhaps the 1904 The Complete Chess Guide, by G.H.D Gossip F.J. Lee, showed the Jerome Gambit's hanger-on status best. At the start of the book the authors proclaim
We have therefore eliminated obsolete openings and confined ourselves merely to a brief examination of a dozen of the leading debuts...; omitting those openings in which the defense is declared by the most competent theorists to be weak or inferior, as for example Philidor's and Petroff's Defenses to the Kings Knight's opening; the Sicilian; the Greco Counter Gambit; Center Counter Gambit; Fianchettoes, Blackwar [sic] and Jerome Gambit, etc.
HOWEVER, Part III of the book, "Guide to the Openings," contained Jerome Gambit analysis!
It was left up to the March 1906 edition of Lasker's Chess Magazine to pronounce
"Our Question Box"
Ichabodf: - No; the Jerome gambit is not named after St. Jerome. His penances, if he did any, were in atonement of rather minor transgressions compared with the gambit.
Recently, Dr. Tim Harding wrote in his "The Kibitzer" column at ChessCafe.com,
In the half century between 1862 and 1912, chess made huge advances in terms of the technical standard of play. The rise of professionalism and annual master tournaments and the growth of chess literature raised the bar in terms of opening knowledge, and positional ideas unknown to the experts of fifty years previously were available to a new generation of players through the example of Steinitz and Lasker and the teachings of Tarrasch.
The "growth of chess literature... in terms of opening knowledge" was apparent during the life of Alonzo Wheeler Jerome (1834 - 1904), and it is no surprise that it overlapped the development of the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+).
[The following review is limited mostly to English-language opening books. - Rick]
In 1874, the year that Jerome's analysis of his gambit was first published in the Dubuque Chess Journal, Synopsis of the Chess Openings by William Cook, Handbuch des Schachspiels (5th edition) by Von der Lasa, and Chess Openings (2nd edition) by Frederick William Longman, all appeared. None contained analysis of the Jerome Gambit.
In 1875, The Chess Openings, by Robert B. Wormald, was equally negligent, as was 1876's Synopsis of the Chess Openings (2nd edition).
Henry Bird's The Chess Openings Considered, Critically and Practically in 1878 also overlooked the American invention.
In 1879, the gambit started to get notice in books, as it was covered in Theory of the Chess Openings by George Hatfeild Dingley Gossip.
The third edition of Cook's Synopsis of the Chess Openings was published in 1882, and it contained analysis as well.
Curiously, at least for those with a modern sense of "intellectual property" and copyright law, in 1884 an American publisher, J.W. Miller, reprinted Cook's Synopsis (originally printed in London) and added an "American Supplement" to create Cook's Synopsis of Chess Openings A Tabular Analysis by William Cook, With American Inventions in the Openings and Fresh Analysis since 1882, by J. W. Miller. Both parts of the book contained Jerome Gambit analysis.
Quoted the New Orleans Times-Democrat in a review
...The "brilliant but unsound" (why, may we ask, is this antithesis so common that one would almost infer it to be necessary?) Jerome Gambit, invented by Mr. Jerome, of Paxton, Ill., about a decade ago, constitutes the next of the Americana, and concerning the analysis given by Mr. S. A. Charles we can only venture to say that it seems to combine much careful original work with variations compiled from such investigations as have been published upon this hazardous attack. The principal basis for most of these has been, we believe, Sorenson's article in the May, 1877, number of the Nordisk Skaktidende, and which as translated in Gossip's Theory, pp.37-39, furnishes the only two variations upon the opening given in the Synopsis proper (ccf. p.49, cols 11 and 12). We note, however, that Mr. Charles differs from this authority in some important particulars.
Miller was the publisher of the Cincinnati Journal Gazette, which had previously employed S.A. Charles to write their chess column, and who had been presenting opening analysis – something he continued to do for the Pittsburgh Telegraph, where his Jerome Gambit analysis appeared. (Skipping ahead, this explains Freeborough and Rankin's comment in their Chess Openings, Ancient and Modern, "Mr. S. A. Charles of Cincinnati, Ohio is named in the American Supplement as the chief analyst of this opening.")
In 1888, the 4th edition of Cook's Synopsis of the Chess Openings contained Jerome Gambit analysis, with a note of thanks to "Mr. Freeborough of Hull, and Rev. C.E. Ranken, of Malven, for material assistance in the compilation of the tables, original variations in the openings, and help in the examination of proof"; so it is not surprising that Freeborough and Rankin's 1889 Chess Openings Ancient and Modern also covered the gambit.
Although the Jerome Gambit would appear in further editions of Chess Openings Ancient and Modern – 2nd, 1893; 3rd, 1896; 4th, 1910 – the closing of the 1880s seems to mark its high water mark in inclusion in general opening books.
With five games left in the ChessWorld Jerome Gambit Thematic Tournament, the leaders have been decided, but battles still rage up and down the finish line.
AsceticKingK9 has taken first place with 27 points out of 28 games, mckenna215 has taken second with 23.5 points out of 28 games, and braken has taken third with 19.5 points out of 28 games.
However, with a recent win Rikiki00 has lept to a tie with Knight32 for fourth place with 18.5 points, and with one game still in play he could, with another win, move into a tie for third.
Down the ladder, Luke Warm is holding onto eleventh place with 8 points, but, with a final win, pixifrufru could leap over him to 9 points out of 28 games. Both could be bypassed by Baron wd von Blanc, heart pirate, who has 7.5 points with two games to complete.
Even martind1991, holding down last place with 2 points out of 23 games, can vault over his nearest rival, klonka59, if he finishes strongly.
