Wednesday, January 1, 2014

Happy New Year! (A Hysterical/Historical Jerome Gambit, Part 2)



                               [Continued from Christmas.] 


So far, the close look at my recent Jerome Gambit game has progressed a half-dozen moves. See "Merry Christmas! A Hysterical/Historical Jerome Gambit, Part 1".

Again, I have historical information from my never-published article submitted to Stefan Bucker for his magazine Kaissiber (and revised, and revised, and revised, and revised, and reassessed).


blitz, FICS, 2013

perrypawnpusher - spince

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Kf8 6.Nxc6 
dxc6 


This position was reached in his first article with analysis of the Jerome Gambit (Dubuque Chess Journal 4/1874) by Alonzo Wheeler Jerome

As early as July 1874 it was clear that Alonzo Wheeler Jerome had no illusions about his gambit, as the Dubuque Chess Journal noted

It should be understood that Mr. Jerome claims in this New Opening "only a pleasant variation of the Giuoco Piano, which may win or lose according to the skill of the players, but which is capable of affording many new positions and opportunities for heavy blows unexpectedly.
This modesty did not prevent Jerome from debating for months with William Hallock, who produced the American Chess Journal in the years following the demise of the Dubuque Chess Journal. While testing his invention in over-the-board and correspondence play, Jerome claimed
…that the opening has a “reasonable chance of winning,” which is sufficient to constitute a “sound opening.” It is not required that an Opening shall be sure to win. There is no such opening contained in chess; at least none that I know of.
In the exchanges of games and analysis that appeared in the American Chess Journal in 1876 and 1877, Hallock progressed from referring to “Jerome’s Double Opening” to “Jerome’s Gambit” to “Jerome’s Absurdity.”
                       
This light-hearted approach found full form in the May 1877 issue of the Danish chess magazine Nordisk Skaktidende, where Lieutenant Sorensen, analyzed the Jerome Gambit in his “Chess Theory for Beginners” column:
With this answering move of the Bishop [1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5] we have the fundamental position for that good old game which the Italians, hundreds of years ago, when they were masters of the Chessboard, 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 QP 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 center, 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 practiced 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.
The August 1877 issue of the British Chess Player’s Chronicle and the December 1877 issue of the Italian Nuova Rivista Degli Scacci, reprinted Sorensen’s article (in English and Italian, respectively), introducing the Jerome Gambit to an even wider audience. Almost every Jerome Gambit analyst since has leaned heavily on Sorensen.

Interest in the Jerome Gambit did not remain just among beginning chess players. A couple of years later, Andres Clemente Vazquez included three wins with the Gambit, from his 1876 match against     Carrington, in his Algunas Partidas de Ajedrez Jugadas in Mexico por Andres Clemente Vazquez.

G. H. D. Gossip’s 1879 book, Theory of the Chess Openings, included an analysis of the Jerome Gambit, “substantially the same” as that which appeared in the Chess Player’s Chronicle, as the latter noted in a review of the work. At about the same time, the American daily newspaper, the Cincinnati Commercial Gazette, in its chess column, struck the right tone in its review of Theory, noting gleefully
...the Jerome Gambit, which high-toned players sometimes affect to despise because it is radically unsound, finds a place, and to this it is certainly entitled.
The next year, in 1880, when the 6th edition of the illustrious Handbuch des Schachspiels was published, the Commercial Gazette’s chess columnist was again ready to “complain” about the state of affairs


…that the "Jerome Gambit" should be utterly (even if
deservedly) ignored.

The Cincinnati connection is an important one in the story of the development of the Jerome Gambit. In the 1870 and 1880s, the chess column of the Commercial Gazette, conducted by J. W. Miller, was considered to be one of the best in the United States. It occasionally ran opening analysis presented by S. A. Charles, a member of the local chess club. By January 1881, Charles had switched to sending his analyses to the Pittsburgh Telegraph (later, the Chronicle-Telegraph).

In October 1881, the Jerome Gambit broke onto the international scene again, in Brentano's Chess Monthly, (edited by H.C. Allen & J.N. Babson), with a letter and analysis from S. A. Charles.


The November 2, 1881 chess column in the Pittsburgh Telegraph ran Charles’ corrected and slightly updated version of his analysis from Brentano's Chess Monthly.


The year 1882 brought yet more attention, from respectable sources, to the Jerome Gambit. William Cook, with the assistance of E. Freeborough and C. E. Ranken, brought out the third edition of his Modern Chess Openings-style Cook's Synopsis of the Chess Openings A Tabulated Analysis. 



7.0-0


Like in the "annoying defense" against the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5+ 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 d6 8.fxe5 dxe5, etc.), Black has returned a piece to achieve a static position that limits White's attacking chances.

Here, though, White has the long-term plan of developing and deliberately advancing his "Jerome pawns". If Black is watchful during this process, he can probably return a second piece for two pawns and sue for peace.

Also played (often transposing) has been 7.d3, as in perrypawnpusher - Jore, blitz, FICS, 2011 (0-1, 16); perrypawnpusher - Conspicuous, blitz, FICS, 2011 (1-0, 13); perrypawnpusher - fortytwooz, blitz, FICS, 2010 (1-0, 29); perrypawnpusher - Lark, blitz, FICS,  2011 (1-0, 12); perrypawnpusher - pitrisko, blitz, FICS, 2011 (0-1, 30); and Wall,B - WMXW, FICS, 2012 (1-0, 31).


7.Nc3 (followed by 8.d3 and 9.0-0 ) was seen in perrypawnpusher - Ykcir, FICS, 14 0 blitz, 2009 (½-½, 11).


7.c3 was seen in Vazquez,A - Carrington,Wm, Mexico, 2nd match 1876 (1-0, 43).


7...Be6 


7...Nf6 was popular in the early games of this line, as in Jerome,A - Brownson,O, Iowa 1875 (½-½, 29); Norton,D - Hallock,A, correspondence, 1877 (0-1,18), Lowe,E - Parker,J, correspondence, 1879,  (0-1, 25);  and Lowe,E - Parker,J, correspondence, 1879 (1-0, 37).


Subsequent analysis has generally followed Jerome - Brownson, Iowa, 1875, with 7.O-O Nf6 8.Qf3 (Sorensen said 8.e5 would be met by 8…Bg4 9.Qe1 Kf7! which was how Norton – Hallock had continued ) Qd4 9.d3 Bg4 10.Qg3. At this point, Brownson played 10…Bb6. Jerome responded with 11.e5, and drew the game, with help from his opponent, in 29 moves. Brownson, in the Dubuque Chess Journal (3/1875), suggested 11.Kh1 and 12.f4 as an improvement for White.


Sorensen, Nordisk Skaktidende, (5/1877) gave the alternative line 10…Bd6, attacking White’s Queen, and followed this up with 11.Bf4 g5 12.Bxd6+ cd 13.h3 Be6 14.Qxg5 Rg8 15.Qh6+ Ke7 16.Nc3 Rg6 17.Qh4 Rag8 with a better game for Black. However, Charles later in the Pittsburg Telegraph (4/27/81) offered 11.c3 as an improvement, suggested to him by Jerome, which they believed reversed the valuation of the line.


As an historical aside, later sources, relying on - read: copying - Sorensen’s analysis, miss 11.c3; those that follow - read: copy - Charles’ work, based on his Brentano article or on the American Supplement, include it.


8.d3 


Better than my goofball 8.Qf3+ from perrypawnpusher - CorH, blitz, FICS, 2009 (0-1, 74). 


8...Qf6 9.Nc3 Ne7 10.Be3 Bd6





[To Be Continued on my birthday January 13, 2014.] 
[Comments and Emails are Welcomed and Encouraged.]

Monday, December 30, 2013

Jerome Gambit-Inspired Play (Part 7)

Turn-around is fair play, they say, and the following game is a fun example. Philidor 1792 is off to a solid 3-minute game, when, suddenly... 


Philidor 1792 - guest1416
3 0 blitz, www.bereg.ru, 2013

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.a3




Here we have Gunsberg's Variation of the Four Knights Game, explored (among other places), along with other double e-pawn openings, in Hugh Myers' 1977 Reversed King Pawns, Mengarini's Opening.


White prepares to take the "black" side of the positions that

develop, hoping to be helped by his "extra" pawn move. Black prepares to play...

4...Bc5


...a reversed Italian game, and, after...


5.Bc4 Bxf2+ 


...he uncorks a Reversed Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit!


The only "reversed" Jerome Gambit that I can find in The Database at this point are lixuanxuan - Polone, blitz, FICS, 2012 (0-1, 27), which began 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Bc5 4.Bc4 Bxf2+ ; and Diophantos - khangaza, blitz, FICS, 2007 (0-1, 34), which began 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Bc5 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.d3 Bxf2+.


Of course, that is not to overlook games like Krejcik, Josef - Baumgartner, Troppau, 1914 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Bc5 3.Nxe5 Bxf2+ 4.Kxf2 Qh4+ 5.g3 Qxe4 6.Qe2 Qxh1 7.Bg2 Black resigns. For a discussion of the Busch - Gass Gambit, see "Worth A Second Look" Parts 1, 2 and 3.


6.Kxf2 Nxe4+ 7.Nxe4 d5 8.d4




Following along the lines of ideas for Black in the regular Jerome Gambit, White could play 8.Bd3 dxe4 9.Bxe4 or 8.Bxd5 Qxd5 9.d3, but, instead he plays the blow-it-up variation - see perrypawnpusher - Marcym, blitz, FICS, 2010 (1-0, 20) and perrypawnpusher - NimbusReign, blitz, FICS, 2010 (0-0, 26).  Why not, he's ahead a couple of pieces, right?


8...exd4


A better idea, according to Houdini, was 8...dxe4 9.Nxe5 Qf6+ 10.Ke1 Be6 11.Bxe6 Qxe6 12.Nxc6 Qxc6, although, despite White's King's central residence, the first player's extra piece still outweigh's Black's extra pawn.


9.Ng3


Solid, but missing 9.Bg5!? when 9...f6 allows a brutal attack 10.Nxf6+ gxf6 11.Re1+ Kf8 12.Bh6+ Kg8 13.Bxd5+ Qxd5 14.Re8+ Kf7 15.Rxh8, according to the computer. That would be a lot for a person to see in a 3-minute game.


9...dxc4 10.Re1+ Be6 11.Kg1 0-0




White has castled-by-hand and might actually believe that his extra piece is worth more than Black's extra three "Jerome pawns". The psychological reversal might have been difficult, with the Jerome-player facing the Jerome.


12.Ng5 Bd5 13.Nf5 Qf6 14.Qg4 Ne5




Instead, 14...Rad8 or 14...Rae8 would have probably kept the game even.


15.Qh3


White presses his counter-attack against the (reversed) Jerome. In a slower game, he might have risked 15.Rxe5!? Qxe5 16.Bf4 h5 (16...Qf6 17.Nxh7 Kxh7 18.Bg5 Qe6 19.Qh5+ Kg8 {19...Qh6 20.Bxh6 g6 21.Qh4 gxf5 22.Bg5+ Kg7 23.Qh6+ Kg8 24.Bf6 Bc6 25.Qg7#} 20.Ne7+ Qxe7) 17.Bxe5 hxg4 18.Ne7+ Kh8 19.Nxd5 with advantage. 


15...h6 16.Ne4 Qe6 17.Kh1 


Safety first - and an even game. Again, with time to burn, Philidor 1792 would certainly have found 17.Bxh6!? Ng6 (17...gxh6 18.Nxh6+ Kg7 19.Nf5+ Kg8 20.Ng5) 18.Neg3, etc. 


17...Ng6 18.Nxd4 Qxh3 19.gxh3 Rae8




Black is now clearly better.


20.Kg1 Rxe4 21.Rxe4 Bxe4 22.Nb5 c6 23.Nd6 Bxc2 24.Nxc4 Rd8 25.Be3 b6 White lost on time




Another Jerome victory!

(Another Random Note: May, 2011, had been the month, so far, with the most page views for this blog since it started in June, 2008 . However, last month November, 2013, overtook it, becoming the month with the most views - until December 2013, which has surpassed both to become Number 1! My "Welcome!" and "Thank You! to everyone stopping by. - Rick) 

Saturday, December 28, 2013

Jerome Gambit-Inspired Play (Part 6)


The Bishop sacrifice at f7, the Queen checks followed by the capture of Black's Knight - if the following game wasn't inspired by the Jerome Gambit, it should have been. (Of course, Philidor 1792 plays the Jerome Gambit!)

The tactical mayhem at the end is as entertaining as it is bewildering.


Philidor 1792 -guest343

3 0 blitz, www.bereg.ru, 2013

1.e4 Nf6 2.Bc4 


Philidor 1792 returns to the Krejcik Gambit in Alekhine's Defense (see an earlier example). As I've mentioned, it's Jerome-ish enough to have been touched on a couple of times earlier in this blog, in "I want my Jerome Gambit!" and "Another Krejcik".


The Krejcik might be a bit unorthodox, but in 3-minute games it can be deadly.


2...Nxe4 3.Bxf7+ Kxf7 4.Qh5+ g6 5.Qd5+ e6 6.Qxe4 Bg7



The position may or may not be balanced - but how much time did each player take to get here?


7.Qf4+ Qf6 8.Qxc7 Nc6 9.Nf3 Rf8



Black prepares to castle-by-hand, an idea always in vogue in Bxf7+ openings, but in doing so he misses the tactical shot 9...Qxf3!?, when 10.gxf3 Be5 would force 11.Qxe5 Nxe5. Either the idea did not appeal to the second player, or he overlooked it. In any event, the opportunity is available for the next 4 moves, as well.


10.O-O Kg8 11.Nc3 d5 12.d3 Qf5 13.Bd2 Ne5 




14.Nd4 Qg4 15.f4 Nxd3 16.Nxe6 Bxe6 17.cxd3 Bd4+ 18.Kh1 Rf5




Black adds a Rook to the aggressive actions of his Queen and two Bishops, so his intentions are clear. He is even willing to let White snipe another  pawn, in order to get the other Rook into play.


19.Qxb7 Raf8 20.Rae1


Houdini prefers 20.Qb4, as the start of a difficult defense that eventually sees White trade off a lot of the attacking pieces, keeping a pawn advantage. Philidor 1792's move is more "human" and keeps the game in balance.


20...Rh5 


21.Rf3


Houdini also suggests 21.Qe7, "forcing" Black (i.e. the best response it sees) to sacrifice a Rook to obtain a draw, with 21...Rxh7+ 22.Kxh7 Qh5+ 23.Kg3 Qg4+, etc. - but who plays chess like that? Neither player is thinking "draw" at this point.


21...Qh4


Of course, the draw is still there with 21...Rxh2+ 22.Kxh2 Qh4+ 23.Rh3 Bxh3 24.gxh3 Qf2+ 25.Kh1 Qf3+, etc.


22.h3


The only move, says Houdini, to avoid checkmate in 32. How annoying!


22...Rhf5


Black cannot find the best continuation - no doubt, time was short and getting shorter - lets slip a piece, and with it the game. What was there was 22...Bg4!?, although White can afford to give up the exchange with 23.Ref1, when 23...Bxf3 24.Rxf3 still leaves Black searching for a way to break through.


23.Rxe6 g5 24.Nxd5 g4 25. Ne7+ Kh8 26.Nxf5 gxf3 27.Nxh4 f2 28.Re1 


Fun!


28...Rxf4 


Fighting to the end!


29.Qb8+ Black resigned, as mate is unavoidable.




Well played, gentlemen!

Thursday, December 26, 2013

Jerome Gambit-Inspired Play (Part 5)

Actually, it is a bit of a stretch to call the following blitz game some sort of a Jerome Gambit - but the swash-buckling nature of it (and the ornery center pawns) may well have been inspired by that wild opening. Let's give it a chance...

Philidor 1792 - guest1063
3 0 blitz, www.bereg.ru, 2013

1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nc6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Bb3 Be7 



Similar to Philidor 1792's play against guest1063 - see "Jerome Gambit-Inspired Play (Part 4)" - but this time looking more like a Hungarian Defense than a Two Knights Defense. 

Does that make a difference? Philidor 1792 now bypasses the Jerome-ish Bxf7+ and tries a tactic similar to that in the Chicago Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nxe5, etc. and the Halloween (Müller - Schulze) Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nxe5, etc.

5.Nxe5 Nxe5 6.d4 Ng6 7.e5 Ng8 



8.Qf3 

With all of the subltety of the Scholar's Mate.

8...f6 

And, just like that, White has full compensation for his piece ("Who dares, wins"), according to Houdini, who prefers 8...d5 9.exd6 Bf6 10.Qe2+ Kf8 11.dxc7 Qxc7 with advantage to Black. 

9.Qd5 Nh6 

And here Black turns over the game to his opponent. Wily Houdini suggests, instead, 9...d6 10.Qf7+ Kd7 11.exd6 cxd6 12.h4 Nh6 13.Bxh6 gxh6 14.h5 Nf4 15.g3 Rf8 16.Ba4+ Kc7 17.Qc4+ Kb8 18.gxf4 d5 leading to an unclear mess which may be balanced. 

10.Bxh6 Rf8 11.Bxg7 c6 12. Qc4 d5 13. exd6 Qxd6
14. Bxf8 Black resigned 



After Black captures the Bishop on f8 he will be down the exchange and two pawns.

Tuesday, December 24, 2013

Merry Christmas! (A Hysterical/Historical Jerome Gambit, Part 1)

Season's Greetings to the Jerome Gambit Gemeinde, and readers everywhere! 

Below is my latest Jerome Gambit game, which includes the "gift" of annotations from the article submitted (and revised, and revised, and revised, and revised, and reassessed) to Stefan Bucker for his magazine Kaissiber. [There is a ton of interesting reading to be found in the above links - and the links below, as well - although I still have not been able to definatively link Alonzo Wheeler Jerome to Winston Churchill.]


perrypawnpusher  - spince
blitz, FICS, 2013

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


4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Kf8


I have faced this defense 16 times, scoring 12 points - 75%, which is still a bit short of my overall Jerome Gambit score of 82% (regular Jerome Gambit 83%, Semi-Italian Jerome Gambit 90%, Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit 74%, Semi-Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit 77%).

As early as his first article with analysis (Dubuque Chess Journal 4/1874), Alonzo Wheeler Jerome considered the possibility that Black might refuse to capture the second piece, and play for King safety instead with 5...Kf8


This was, in fact, the defense that Jerome, himself, credited to G. J. Dougherty, ("a strong amateur, against whom I first played the opening") of Mineola, New York, in a yet unfound game; that O.A. Brownson, editor of the Dubuque Chess Journal, played against Jerome in an 1875 game (Dubuque Chess Journal 3/1875); that magazine editor William Hallock used against D.P. Norton in an 1876 correspondence game played “by special request” to test the gambit (American Chess Journal 2/1877); that William Carrington tried in his 1876 match vs Mexican Champion Andres Clemente Vazquez (Algunas Partidas de Ajedrez Jugadas en Mexico, 1879); and which Lt. Soren Anton Sorensen recommended as “more solid and easier to manage” in his seminal Jerome Gambit essay (Nordisk Skaktidende 5/1877).


It is interesting that early in Jerome's Gambit's life, there were players willing to accept one "gift" but who were skeptical of accepting two "gifts".


6.Nxc6

Bill Wall has experimented with 6.Nd3 in Wall,B - Tim93612, Chess.com, 2010 (1-0, 36) and 6.0-0 in billwall - DeDrijver, Chess.com, 2012 (1-0, 20).


White also has the option of playing 6.Qh5, the Banks Variation, as in Banks - Rees, Halesowen, 2003, when Black can transpose with 6…Nxe5  as recommended by the American Chess Journal, (3/1877) - "The continuation adopted by Jerome, Qh5 looks promising."


Pete Banks ("blackburne" online), a stalwart member of the Jerome Gambit Gemeinde (and still the strongest player I know who has played the Jerome regularly over-the-board in rated contests), brought international attention to Alonzo Wheeler Jerome's invention by writing to International Master Gary Lane, who commented at length on the opening, and on a couple of Banks' games, in his March ("The Good Old Days") and April ("Chess Made Easy") 2008 "Opening Lanes" columns at ChessCafe.com. IM Lane also mentioned one of Banks' games in his The Greatest Ever chess tricks and traps (2008), which reprised some of the earlier material.

It is humorous to note that in his "Opening Lanes" column Lane wrote, after 5.Nxe5+, "I think anyone with good manners playing Black would now kindly ask their opponent if they wanted to take their move back" while in his book he changed this to "I think anyone with good manners playing Black would now go to another room to carry on laughing."

Apropos the Banks Variation itself (i.e. playing 6.Qh5 in response to 5...Kf8), IM Lane noted in "The Good Old Days" that "6...Qe7 is a good alternative [to 6...Qf6 of Banks - Rees], because it stops the checkmate and protects the bishop on c5."

A few months later, 6...Qe7 was tested successfully in a GameKnot.com game, splott - mika76, 20081.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Kf8 6.Qh5 Qe7 7.Ng6+ hxg6 8.Qxh8 Qxe4+ 9.Kf1 Qd4 10.Ke1 Qxf2+ 11.Kd1 d6 12.h3 Qxg2 13.Re1 Qf3+ 14.Re2 Bf2 15.d3 Nd4 16.Nc3 Qh1+ 17.Kd2 Nf3 checkmate. Clearly White, the very-slightly-higher rated player, was taken aback by the move. I asked mika76 if he had been influenced by IM Lane's recommendation, but he said he had come up with the move himself.

6...dc

Jerome, in his 1874 analysis, gave 6…bc 7.d4 “putting Black’s KB out of play”. This was supported by, among several games, perrypawnpusher - mika76, GameKnot.com, 2008 (1-0, 18)



[To Be Continued on New Year's Day.] 
[Comments and Emails are Welcomed and Encouraged.]

Sunday, December 22, 2013

Jerome Gambit-Inspired Play (Part 4)



A solid belief of the Jerome Gambiteer is "In complications we trust". A lot of action goes on in the following game, but Philidor 1792 again shows himself to be the master of the clock in 3-minute games. By the last move, Black has frittered away almost all of his advantage - but, more importantly, all of his time.

Philidor 1792 - guest1063
3 0 blitz, www.bereg.ru, 2013

1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6


The game has transposed to a Two Knights Defense, although I have to mention the alternative: 3...Nxe4 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Kg8 6.0-0 d6 7.Qe2 dxe5 8.Qc4+ Black resigned, Zulkifli, Tg - Lai, Wendy, Kuala Lumpur open, 1992. 

4.Bb3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ 

Now we have sort of a "postponed" Jerome Gambit, with White playing the Jerome a move down (Black has the extra ...Nf6).

5...Kxf7 6.Nxe5+ Nxe5 7.d4 Bxd4 8.Qxd4 d6


There are actually 4 other games in The Database with this position, in each case White having played d2-d3, then d3-d4.

9.f4 Nc6 10.Qd3 Re8 11.Nc3 Bf5 12.0-0 Nxe4


Much better was 12...Bxe4.

13.Qd5+ Kg6 14.Rf3 Qf6 15.Nxe4 Rxe4 16.Rg3+ Kh6


White wants to attack, and Black, as his clock ticks down, has to defend.

17.Rh3+ Bxh3 18.f5+ Kh5 19.Qxe4 Qxf5 20.Qe3 Rf8 21.Bd2 Bg4 22.h3 Bxh3 23.gxh3 Ne5 


24.Kg2 g5 25.Bc3 h6 26.Re1 Qf4 

Not the strongest, but Black is running short of time, and swapping Queens would simplify a position in which he has a 2-pawn advantage.

27.Bxe5 dxe5 28.Qxe5 Qf2+ 29.Kh1 Qf3+ 30.Kh2 Qf4+ 31.Qxf4 Rxf4 

32.Kg3 Kg6 33.Re7 Rc4 34.c3 h5 35.Re8 g4 36.hxg4 hxg4 37.Rg8+ White won on time



Friday, December 20, 2013

A New Jerome Gambit Player (Part 2)


Steve Wall is back with another investigation into the Jerome Gambit.

Wall,S - Guest658246

PlayChess.com, 2013

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 




4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 Bxf2+



Just about everyone who plays the Jerome Gambit faces this "bail out" variation at one point or another. Black manages to exchange Queens at the cost of returning a piece, and with the prospect of playing on, a pawn down. White can no longer play "his" attack; but he also no longer has an "objectively" lost game.


White, in The Database, scores 69% across 90 games. 


8.Kxf2 Qf6+ 9.Qxf6+ Nxf6 10.Nc3 Kg7 




Surprisingly - for such a reasonable move - Black's last is the first example in The Database. 


11.d3 Rf8 12.Ke2 d6 13.h3 Nh5 14.Kd1 Ng3 15.Rg1 Bd7 16.b3 Rf7 17.Bb2 Kg8 18.Nd5 Raf8



19.Nxc7 Rf1+ 20.Rxf1 Rxf1+ 21.Kd2 Rf2+ 22.Kc3 Ne2+ 23.Kc4 Rxg2 24.Kd5 Nf4+ 


White's material advantage and better developed King make the difference.


25.Kxd6 Bxh3


The alternative capture, 25...Rxc2 26.Kxd7 Rxb2 allows 27.d4, and White's center pawns will cost Black his Knight. Still, it would probably have been a stronger defense.


26.Be5 g5 27.Bxf4 gxf4 28.Nd5 f3 29.Nf4 Rg3 30.Nxh3 Rxh3 31.e5 


Darn those Jerome pawns! 


31...f2 32.Rf1 Rf3 33.e6 Kf8 34.Kd7 Black resigned