Yesterday's game, Byrne [Bryne] - Farwell, San Francisco, 1859, serves as a curious bridge between two pieces of Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) history. On the one hand, as we have seen, the opening moves transpose to what later will become known as the Semi-Italian Jerome Gambit. On the other hand, it introduces to this blog a player, Willard B. Farwell, who has a couple of other games in the historical California chess database — one of which approaches the question of what games might have influenced Alonzo Wheeler Jerome in the creation of his gambit (see "A Distant Relative?").
Farwell,W - Jones,E
San Francisco, 1859
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4
This is the Scotch Gambit, but, hold on.
4...Bc5 5.Ng5 Nh6
And now, a relatively familiar set of moves...*
6.Nxf7 Nxf7 7.Bxf7+ Kxf7 8.Qh5+ g6 9.Qxc5
The game is about even, although White went on to lose in a miniature (9...d5 10.e5 Re8 11.f4 Nxe5 12.fxe5 Rxe5+ 13.Kd2 Qg5+ 14.Kd3 Re3+ 0-1).
I checked the position after White's 7th move in the ChessLab online database, and discovered a line of games with a whole host of familiar names, on both sides of the board, including:
Labourdonnais - Haxo, Gilvoisin, 1837 (1/2-1/2, 33)
Shumov - Jaenisch, St. Petersburg, 1850 (1-0, 20)
NN - Harrwitz, Paris, 1852 (0-1, 13)
Meek - Morphy, Alabama, 1855 (0-1, 21)
Montgomery - Allison, New York, 1857 (0-1, 59)
Kennicott - Morphy, New York, 1857 (0-1, 24)
Steinkuhler - Blackburne, Manchester, 1861 (0-1, 24)
Ranken - Staunton, London, 1866 (0-1, 24)
Could this be the trail of another "godfather" of the Jerome Gambit? I will be digging deeper...
*-Opening analysis of the time warned against 5...Ne5, because of 6.Nxf7 Nxf7 7.Bxf7+ Kxf7 8.Qh5+ g6 9.Qxc5, going back at least as far as Sarratt - NN, 1818.. Familiar?
Although the following game did not take place during the California Chess Congress of 1858, mentioned yesterday, its participants were from that event's organizing committee. Balancing this out, the opening transposes into what we now know as a Semi-Italian Jerome Gambit, 15 years before Alonzo Wheeler Jerome first published his opening analysis.
Byrne [or Bryne], Thomas - Farwell, Willard B.
San Francisco, California, 1859
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6
The Semi-Italian Opening.
4.d4 exd4 5.Nxd4 Bc5
A careless choice that allows White to go Jerome.
6.Bxf7+ Kxf7 7.Qh5+ Kf8
Instead, diddan23- Sirfixulot, Chess.com, 2012, which we looked at a couple of days ago, continued 7...g6.
8.Qxc5+ d6 9.Qc3 Nxd4 10.Qxd4 Nf6
White is up a pawn, with greater center control and a safer King.
11.O-O c5 12.Qd3 Be6 13.c4 Kf7 14.f4 Qc7
Linking his Rooks. Black might have done better with 14...Re8 15.Nc3 Kg8, castling-by-hand first.
15.Nc3 a6 16.e5
Pushing the other "Jerome pawn" with 16.f5 was more dynamic.
16...dxe5 17.fxe5 Qxe5 18.Be3 Rhd8 19.Qe2 Kg8
The game is relatively balanced now.
20.h3 Ne4 21.Bxh6 Qd4+ 22.Be3 Nxc3 23.bxc3 Qe4 24.Rf4 Qe5 25.Raf1 b5 26.Qf3 Bxc4 27.Re4 Qxc3 28.Rc1 Qa5
Black has been gathering material, but here his Queen should have stayed in the midst of the action with 28...Qd3, because his King has safety issues.
29.Qh5
Here White misses a chance to start weaving a mating net with the alternative 29.Rh4.
Black should now counter with 29...Rd5 and then the position, while tense, would be balanced. Instead, he decides: one more pawn...
29...Qxa2 30.Rh4 Qa3
Allowing mate in 9, starting with 31.Qh7+, although White plays otherwise.
31.Qh8+ Kf7 32.Rf4+
Good, although 32.Qh5+ still mates.
32... Ke6 33.Re4+ Kf7 34.Qh5+ Kg8
Suddenly, it appears that White has used his chances up. Where is the checkmate? In the meantime, Black's three connected passed pawns have their own sense of danger, and White's King is not completely safe himself.
Where is the checkmate? After giving the position a lot of attention, Houdini and I can find no more than a draw (by repetition of position) for White!
35.Qg4 Black resigned
It is likely that with 35...Qd3 (centralizing the Queen!) followed by 36...Qd7, Black could have assured his defense.
Here we have some of the strangeness that would become the Jerome Gambit.
Shortly after posting yesterday's game
— see "A Jerome Look At The Semi-Italian Opening (Part 4)" — I discovered an interesting historical encounter in a database of historical California chess games.
First, some atmosphere from an interesting article by John Hilbert on "California Chess 1858-1859"
Interest in chess spread rapidly across the United States following Paul Morphy's sensational victory at New York 1857, followed by his triumphant European tour. New chessplayers and new clubs sprang up across the land, and the clubs already in existence gained greatly by the Morphy boom. California was no different. In its May 1858 issue The Chess Monthly, edited by Morphy and Daniel W. Fiske, reported that the chess bug had indeed hit the West Coast, and that a California Chess Congress inspired by Morphy and New York 1857 was being planned. Curiously enough, while The Chess Monthly detailed the course of the event, it did not provide any games from the tournaments. That detail was left to the pages of Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper, which published five games from the top tournament. Coverage of the Congress on the East Coast was of course delayed by the lengthy distances such news had to travel. Three San Francisco chess clubs joined together to host the Congress: the Mechanic's Institute, the German Chess Club of San Francisco, and the Pioneer Chess Club. A committee of management was formed to take charge of the event, its members being Selim Franklin (President of the Congress), W. Schleiden, D.S. Roberts, Wm. R. Wheaton, Geo. Pen Johnston, Willard B. Farwell, Thomas Bryne, B.F. Voorhies, Edward Jones, Charles Mayne, M. Eilas, and H.R. Bacon. Entrance was fixed at five dollars, and players were to be divided into classes according to ability...
...The Morphy chess boom, though, didn't last. Chess in the United States lost many of its gains in the years following Morphy's earliest and grandest successes. By March 13, 1861, a correspondent in California could write The Chess Monthly as follows:"During the latter part of 1858 and the beginning of 1859, while Mr. Morphy was pursing his unparalleled successes, the chess fever reached its height in San Francisco. Several chess clubs were formed, a grand Tournament was held, and all classes of the community were seized with a rage for playing chess. Since then the interest in our game has somewhat declined, and there is now no regular club in the city..."
Some more on the the 1858 tournament
The California Chess Congress of 1858 was one of the earliest tournaments in U.S. chess history. It was held at the Hunt's Building in San Francisco from March 22nd through May 1st. The chess congress was hosted by the Pioneer Chess Club, the German Chess Club and the Mechanics' Institute Chess Club, all located in San Francisco. The worldwide chess fever created by the 1857 world championship victories in New York by young Paul Morphy had reached the Pacific Coast. The 1858 Congress in San Francisco was covered in the May 1858 issue of The Chess Monthly and game details were provided in Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper which published five games from the tournament. The event drew lots of spectators and match play continued past midnight. The President of the Congress was Selim Franklin, who came to San Francisco from London in 1849, and played chess in London and New York. The members of the organizing committee included W. Schleiden, Daniel S. Roberts, William R. Wheaton, Geo. Pen Johnston, Willard B. Farwell, Thomas Bryne, B.F. Voorhies, Judge Edward Jones, Charles Mayne, M. Eilas, and H.R. Bacon. The California Chess Congress began on Monday evening, March 22.
Although the chess database has the game (which we will look at tomorrow) listed as "Byrne" - Farwell, the above listing suggests that it was between Thomas Bryne and Willard B. Farwell.
The following game, from the ongoing Chess.com "Italian Opening" tournament, adds to the series of posts that started with "A Jerome Look At The Semi-Italian Opening (Part 1)".
diddan23 (1830) - Sirfixulot (1294)
"Italian Game", Chess.com, 2012
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6
The Semi-Italian Opening.
4.d4 exd4 5.Nxd4 Bc5
Possibly thinking of a transposition to the Scotch, but, as I've written elsewhere about White, Even the conservative player should be thinking "Jerrrrrrroooooommmmmme!"
6.Bxf7+ Kxf7 7.Qh5+ g6 8.Qxc5
The Database shows White scoring 78% from this position (130 games).
8...Qe7 9.Qxe7+ Kxe7 10.Nxc6+ bxc6
11.Nc3 Ba6 12.Be3 d6 13.0-0-0 Nf6 14.f3 Rab8
Giving up a pawn for an attack, but not enough comes of it.
15.Bxa7 Rb7 16.Be3 Rhb8 17.b3 g5 18.h4 g4 19.Bxh6 gxf3 20.gxf3 Nh5
Now Black's game goes all a-kilter.
21.Rhg1 Kf6 22.Rg4 Rb6 23.Rdg1 d5 24.exd5 cxd5 25.Nxd5+ Kf5 26.Nxb6 Rxb6 27.Rg5+ Kf4 28.Rxh5+ Kxf3 29.Rf5+ Ke4 30.Rf4+ Ke3
The game continues, but not for much longer.
As I noted yesterday, I have started my first 5 games in the Italian Opening tournament at Chess.com.
Since 3 games have been with the Black pieces, there was no chance for a Jerome Gambit (at least by me, although I played 3...Bc5 each time, offering my opponents the opportunity) in those. In one game with the White pieces, my opponent opted for 3...Nf6 and against my try to transpose to the Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit with 4.Nc3 he elected to use the "fork trick" 4...Nxe4;
while in the other I was met with the interesting 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bd6!?.
Still, this is a 25-player tournament, broken into 5 5-player groups, so that is a lot of Italian Opening play. I checked out the other games that have started, and was delighted to find one transpose into a Semi-Italian Jerome Gambit: perfectly reasonable, as the player of the White pieces has a rating 500+ points higher than his opponent. The gambiteer is up a Rook and three pawns now, and I will be pleased to present the game upon its conclusion.
I have started my first 4 games in the Italian Opening tournament at Chess.com, mentioned earlier. Since 3 games were with the Black pieces, there was no chance for a Jerome Gambit (at least by me, although I played 3...Bc5 each time, offering my opponents the opportunity) there. In the one game with the White pieces, I tried for an Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit, but my opponent opted to use the "fork trick" (lucky for me I have Yury Bukayev's analysis to help me find my way, there).
This reminds me of a story from the San Antonio tournament 40 years ago, as reported in Bent Larsen and David Levy's San Antonio, 1972 : Church's Fried Chicken, Inc. First International Chess Tournament. American master Ken Smith played his Smith–Morra Gambit (1.e4. c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3) against Grandmasters Larry Evans, Donald Byrne and Henrique Mecking, and lost each time. When Mario Campos Lopez faced Smith, though, he played the French Defence instead of the Sicilian, causing Larsen to comment in the tournament book "stronger is 1...c5 which wins a pawn."
I am going to have to start annotating 3...Nf6 in my games with "stronger is 3...Bc5, which wins two pieces"!
So far, I have won one game in the tournament, and in the rematch with my opponent I will have the White pieces, so I am hoping... (Oh, no, he just played 3...Nf6).
Sad to say, it is not a good time to be the online computer program Boris at sparkchess.com, at least as far as the Jerome Gambit goes. No sooner had Bill Wall handed the silicon monster its head, as it were, he decided to see if he could improve on Dave Black's recent thrashing of the program – and, remember, Dave disassembled it and delivered mate in 18 moves.
Wall,B - Boris
sparkchess.com 2012
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 g5
In the computer world, as well as in the human chess world, it is dangerous to become too predictable. Readers saw this defense in "Boris Isn't So Hot," and you can be sure that Bill Wall saw it, too.
8.fxe5 Kxe5 9.Rf1
Deviating from 9.c3 of Black,D - Boris, sparkchess.com, 2012, (1-0, 18).
9...Be7
An improvement over 9...d5 from GuestCRJQ - Despistado, FICS, 2009 (1-0, 26). Still, White is better, thanks to Black's exposed King.
10.d4+ Kxd4
In order to avoid checkmate, Boris needed to play 10...Kd6, which was where he placed his King against Dave Black, when checked in that game by 10.d4+.
11.Be3+ Kxe3 12.Qf3+ Kd4 13.Qc3+ Kxe4 14.Qd3+ Ke5 15.Rf5+ Ke6 16.Qd5 checkmate
