Chessfriend Vlasta Fejfar sent a recent Jerome Gambit that he played. I am not sure if it is a correspondence game, like the previous three we have examined - see "Correspondence Play (Part 1)", "Correspondence Play (Part 2)" and "Correspondence Play (Part 3)" - but it is a long and difficult affair, showing the persistence and energy that sometimes is required of the gambiteer when his inital attack is warded off. His (expected) half-point is well-earned.
I have added some game references to assist the next Jerome Gambiteer who embarks on the journey.
Fejfar, Vlastimil - Goc, Pavel
2015
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 d6
Ah, yes, the "annoying defense". Black gives back a piece and snuffs out much of White's attacking play. Well, Vlasta has faced this before!
8.fxe5 dxe5 9.Qh3+ Ke7
Interesting. Fejfar,V - Pressl, corr Czech Republic, 2015 (1/2-1/2, 15) and Fejfar,V - Kyzlink, corr Czech Republic, 2015 (1-0, 22) continued 9...Kd6.
At 25 ply, Stockfish 6 shows the tiniest preference for 9...Ke7 over 9...Kd6, but likes 9...Kf7 best of all.
10.Qg3 Kf7 11.Qxe5
Also seen: 11.Rf1+ Nf6 12.Qxe5 Bb4 13.Qh5+ g6 14.Qf3 Re8 15.c3 Bf8 16.d4 Kg7 17.Bg5 Be7 18.e5 Ng4 19.Bxe7 Rxe7 20.h3 Nh6 21.Qf6+ Kg8 22.Qf4 Nf7 23.Nd2 c5 24.Ne4 cxd4 25.cxd4 Bf5 26.Nc3 Qb6 27.0-0-0 Rc8 28.g4 Bd7 29.Rd2 Qe6 30.Kb1 b5 31.Ne4 Kg7 32.Re2 Bc6 33.Nc5 drawn, Philidor1792 - NN, friendly match without time control, 2012.
11...Bd4
A number of games where Philidor1792 faced 11...Qh4+ can be found in the "Philidor1792 vs The Annoying Defense (Part 2)" post.
For 11...Qd6 see Wall,B - Qi,H, Chess.com, 2011 (1-0, 14); for 11...b6 see Wall,B - Redom,T, Chess.com, 2010, (1/2-1/2, 59).
12.Rf1+
An alternate is 12.Qh5+: 12...g6 13.Qf3+ Nf6 14.d3 Bg4 15.Qf4 Qd6 16.Qxd6 cxd6 17.Nd2 (17.c3 Bc5 18.Rf1 h6 19.d4 Bb6 20.h3 Be6 21.e5 dxe5 22.dxe5 Bf5 23.g4 Rae8 24.Kd1 Rxe5 25.gxf5 Rxf5 26.Rxf5 gxf5 27.Kc2 Kg6 28.Nd2 Re8 29.Nf3 Re4 30.Bd2 a6 31.Rf1 Bc5 32.b4 Ba7 33.Kd3 b5 34.a4 bxa4 35.c4 Nh5 36.Ra1 Nf4+ 37.Bxf4 Rxf4 38.Nd2 Bf2 39.Rxa4 Be1 40.Rxa6+ Kg5 41.c5 Bxd2 42.b5 Bb4 43.c6 Rh4 44.c7 Rxh3+ 45.Kd4 Bc3+ 46.Kd5 Rd3+ 47.Ke6 Re3+ 48.Kf7 Bf6 49.Rxf6 Black resigned, Wall,B - Harshini,A, chess-db, 2015) 17...Rac8 18.c3 Bb6 19.Rf1 Rhe8 20.h3 Bd7 21.Nc4 Rxc4 22.dxc4 Rxe4+ 23.Kd1 Rxc4 24.Bg5 Bd8 25.g4 h5 26.Bxf6 Bxf6 27.g5 Bf5 28.gxf6 Bxh3 29.Rf2 Bf5 30.Rd2 Rc6 31.Ke2 Kxf6 32.Ke3 Ke7 33.Re1 Rc5 34.Kf4+ Be6 35.Rde2 Rf5+ 36.Kg3 Rf6 37.Kh4 Kf7 38.Re4 a5 39.b3 Ke7 40.c4 b6 41.Kg5 Kf7 42.R1e2 Rf5+ 43.Kh6 Rf6 44.R2e3 Ke7 45.a3 Kf7 46.a4 Ke7 47.Rd4 Kd7 48.Kg7 Ke7 49.Rh4 g5 50.Rxh5 Rf7+ 51.Kg6 g4 52.Rh4 Rf6+ 53.Kg5 Rf7 54.Rh6 Rf5+ 55.Kxg4 Rf6+ 56.Kg5 Rf5+ 57.Kh4 Rf4+ 58.Kg3 Rf6 59.Rxf6 Kxf6 60.Kf4 Bd7 61.Ke4 Bc6+ 62.Kd4 Kf7 63.Rh3 Kg6 64.Rh8 Kf7 65.Rb8 b5 66.axb5 Bf3 67.b6 Ke6 68.b7 Kd7 69.Rd8+ Kxd8 70.b8Q+ Black resigned, Wall,B - Alibak, chess-db, 2015.
12...Nf6 13.Qh5+ Kg8 14.Qe2
Aha! A human being improves upon 14.Qg5 of Fritz 5.32 - Junior 7, The Jeroen Experience, 2003 (0-1, 32). Still, White has to be careful, with his King in the middle of the board, and with Black having much better piece development.
14...Be6 15.c3 Be5 16.g3 c5 17.d3 Qd6
18.Bf4 Bg4 19.Qe3 Bh3 20.Rf3 Bg4 21.Rf1
White is willing to repeat the position and agree on a draw.
21...Re8 22.Nd2 Bxf4 23.gxf4 b5
More worry for White. He holds on to the fact that Black's second Rook is still blocked out of play.
24.e5 Nd5 25.Qg3 Qg6 26.Ne4 c4 27.Kd2 Bf5 28.Nd6 Rd8
29.dxc4
Bold. I would have chosen the more solid 29.d4, but then Black would probably play 29...b4!?
29...bxc4 30.Rae1 Qxg3 31.hxg3 Ne7 32.Ke3 Bd3 33.Rg1 Nf5+ 34.Nxf5 Bxf5
The piece exchanges have reduced the danger to White's King (who is well-placed to support the "Jerome pawns") but Black still believes he can make something out of his piece vs 2 pawns advantage.
35.Rd1 Kf7 36.Rd4 h5 37.Rgd1 Rc8 38.Rh1 g6 39.Rh2 Ke7
The game has taken on an oddly closed nature. That does not last long, however.
40.a4 Rc6 41.Rd5 Be6 42.Rb5 Rc7 43.Rd2 h4 44.gxh4 Rxh4 45.Rd4 Rh3+ 46.Kf2 Rd3 47.a5 Rxd4 48.cxd4 Bd7 49.Rb8 Ke6 50.Ke3 Kd5
Black continues to push his small endgame advantage.
51.a6 c3 52.bxc3 Rxc3+ 53.Kf2 Bc8 54.Ra8 Rc7 55.Ke3 Rc3+ 56.Kf2 Kxd4 57.Rxa7 Ke4 58.Rg7 Kf5
Black does not want to trade off his last pawn (i.e. 58...Bxa6 59.Rxg6) but I think he misjudges the resulting reduced endgame.
59.a7 Ra3 60.Rf7+ Kg4 61.Rf8 Bb7 62.e6 Rxa7 63.e7 Bc6 64.e8Q Bxe8 65.Rxe8 Kxf4
66.Rf8+ Kg4 67.Rc8 g5 68.Rc3 Kh4 69.Kg1 Ra2 70.Rb3 g4
At this point the game was turned over to a referee for ajudication.
I am pretty sure that anyone familiar with Philidor's position will see that the game is drawn. Failing that, consulting the online Nalimov tablebases will also show that the point should be split.
Excelsior!
The American Chess Journal for December 1876 (page 119) under its "Chess News And Notes" mentioned
In a letter recently received from Max Judd, the well-known St. Louis champion, in referring to the article in November JOURNAL concerning "Jerome's Double Opening," he remarks: " What you say about the Jerome Gambit is just so. In an off-hand game you can try many other sacrifices which might succeed, but I know of no gambit wherin a piece can be safely sacrificed, and it is a question whether even a pawn can be safely given up."
In Mr. Blackburne's Games at Chess (1899), the notorious Jerome Gambit game Amateur - Blackburne was given as "played at Simpson's Divan about 1880."
I have questioned the date that Blackburne gave - See "Flaws (Part I)" - as the August 15, 1885 issue of the Brooklyn Chess Chronicle (J.B. and E.M. Munoz, editors) presented the game as having been "played some months ago" which would suggest that it was played during 1885, but not likely in July or August of that year.
It now looks like I will have to back off from my correction, and add even more uncertainty to the date of the game.
Tim Harding's Joseph Henry Blackburne A Chess Biography (2015) - which, as I have noted, does not give Amateur - Blackburne - shows that the British master left for Australia in December 1884, and spent the first half of 1885 "Down Under". A return home was short-lived, as there was an important tournament to participate in
Blackburne and son apparently disembarked at Plymouth on 4 July. As the ship was only docked at Gravesend on the fifth, they must have come up to London by express train. Every day counted, the first round in Hamsburg being on 12 July. After less than a week in England, Blackburne was off on his travels again.
The Hamburg tournament ended July 27, wherupon Blackburne went to Hereford for the Counties Chess Association Masters tournament, which started August 3.
The events of 1885, therefore, do not appear consistent with the Brooklyn Chess Chronicle admittedly casual dating.
It is possible to extend Munoz and Munoz's "some months" further back in time and look for Amateur - Blackburne in 1884, although there are difficulties in this, too. Harding notes
Blackburne's mid-career health breakdown began before Christmas 1883 when he was forced to cancel all his engagements.
In an age "long before antibiotics or even aspirin and other effective medicines", Blackburne was quite ill.
In late April or early May [1884] he resumed playing at the [Simpson's] Divan; some casual games are preserved from that period...
However, his participation in Simpson's handicap tournament in the spring was affected by his "unfortunate illness" and it is worth noting
[T]he Morning Post, 30 June 1884, said that Blackburne's illness had "left him in a weak state of health, and has prevented him for several months from pursuing his avocation."
Although he travelled to Glasgow the last week in July 1884, it does not appear that his full health returned before his trip to Australia.
Unless I guess "late April or early May" 1884 (above), then "about 1880" (from Blackburne's book) will be as "precise" as I will be able to date Amateur - Blackburne, until another chess column, magazine, or book reference surfaces; especially if we recall the uncertainties mentioned by Brazilian chess master Hindemburg Melão, Jr. in his article for the online chess site, SuperAjedrez,
...Some sources indicate year of the game as 1868, others indicate 1888, and others indicate 1880. Some sources affirm that it was played in Manchester, others in London. Normally the name of the adversary is not given, having only "NN" or "Amateur", but in at least one source "Millner" is indicated as the name. Also it is not known if it was an individual game or part of a simultaneous display... [T]he game deserves to be cited as one of most beautiful pearls of blindfold Chess...
I recently received an email from Philidor 1792 who shared a game of his where his Evans Gambit Declined was met with a Jerome Gambit-style defense. The game became quite complicated, although our hero won in the end. (Ask not for whom the chess clock flags, it flags for thee...)
Philidor 1792 - guest234
blitz, 3 0, www.bereg.ru, 2015
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4
The Evans Gambit. Black declines the pawn.
4...Bb6 5.a4 Nf6
This is risky, but perhaps Black had already planned his sacrifice.
6.a5 Bxf2+
In the only similar game that I have seen, Black avoided the sacrifice: 6...Bd4 7.Nxd4 Nxd4 8.Nc3 O-O 9.d3 h6 10.Ne2 Ne6 11.f4 exf4 12.Nxf4 Nxf4 13.Bxf4 c6 14 Be3 d5 15.Bb3 Bg4 16.Qd2 Re8 17.exd5 cxd5 18.O-O d4 19.Bf2 Be6 20.Bxe6 Rxe6 21.Qf4 Rd6 22.Bg3 Nh5 23.Qxd6 Qxd6 24.Bxd6 Rd8 25.Bc5 Rb8 26.Bxa7 Ra8 27.Bxd4 Rc8 28.c3 Rd8 29.Rf5 g5 30.Rb5 Nf4 31.Rxb7 Nxd3 32.a6 f5 33.a7 Nf4 34.a8=Q Ne2+ 35.Kf1 Rf8 36.Bc5 Ng3+ 37.hxg3 Rxa8 38.Rxa8 checkmate, Ian Rodrigo Sanchez Su - Enzo Quesada, IRT SANTISIMO NOMBRE DE JESUS 2015 -III.
7.Kxf2 Nxe4+ 8.Kg1 d5 9.Bb3 Qd6 10.d3 Nf6 11.c3 O-O
Black has two pawns for his sacrificed piece, plus a solid pawn center, good development and a safe King. While Stockfish 6 rates White as about 1/2 a pawn better, the first player's uncertain King and locked in Rook make things anything but easy.
12.b5
Choosing the Queenside to battle. Otherwise, 12.Bg5.
12...Nxa5 13.Ba3
The computer gives a couple alternative lines: 13.Rxa5 Qb6+ 14.d4 Qxa5 15.dxe5 Qb6+ 16.Nd4 Nd7 17.Bf4 c6 18.bxc6 bxc6; or 13.Bc2 Qb6+ 14.d4 Re8 15.h3 e4 16.Ne5 Rxe5 17.Rxa5 Bd7 18.Ra3 Rf5.
13...Qb6+ 14.Kf1 Ng4
Things are becoming uncomfortable for White - but, remember, he is a master of the 3 0 blitz game, and, as the Rolling Stones sang, "Time is on my side."
15.Qe2 Nxb3 16.Ra2 Ne3+ 17.Ke1 e4 18.Nd4 Nxd4 19.cxd4 Qxd4 White won on time
My suggestion is that Readers start off the new year by looking back. There is a lot of information in the previous 2,160 blog posts here!
Not sure of the names of all of the lines in the Jerome Gambit? Review some "Jerome Gambit Nomenclature".
Catch up on "Jerome Gambit: Early Opening Tomes" Part 1 and Part 2.
Earlier on this blog, I have looked at the Sarratt or Vitzthum Attack as a possible fore-runner to the Jerome Gambit. (See "A Bridge To... Somewhere?", "Another Distant Relative?", "The Sarratt Attack" and "Another look at the Sarratt Attack").
Recently I discovered a game published in the "Chess" column of the April 23, 1876 issue of the St. Louis Globe - Democrat. I have changed the notation from descriptive to algebraic and added some diagrams. The comments remain those of the newpaper's chess editor.
Chess in St. Louis
A Rapid Skirmish, Recently Played At St. Louis Chess Club
Mr. H - Mr. M
St. Louis Chess Club, 1876
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4
This was long the accepted move at this point, but now 4.Nxd4 is now more common.
4...Bc5 5.Ng5 Nh6 6.Nxf7 Nxf7 7.Bxf7+ Kxf7 8.Qh5+ g6 9.Qxc5
All "book" so far.
9...Rf8
9...d5 is the only correct move here, giving black the better game.
10.Bh6 Re8 11.Nd2 Kg8 12.Qd5+ Kh8 13.Qf7
White now wins by force, let black play as he will.
13...Rg8 14.Nf3 Qe8 15.Ng5 and wins
