Jerome Gambit: Velveteen Rabbit (Part 1)

The title of today's post was laid out, previously

Like Pinocchio or the Velveteen Rabbit, the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) longs to become a "real" chess opening, or at least a "normal" one. 

Of course, that is a bit of a stretch for something so often refuted. 

Yet, occasionally, I experience a sense of "normality", as I noted a while back in my post "Still More Errors in Thinking 4.0"

I mean, I play a game, I publish it on this blog, someone takes that information and uses it in another one of my Jerome Gambits. I publish that game in this blog, someone elses uses that information in another of my Jerome Gambits...

Just like a real opening.

perrypawnpusher - warwar
"Italian Battleground", Chess.com, 2018

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6

This variation does not have a name, but it could well be titled the Brownson Defense, after O.A. Brownson, who played it in Jerome - Brownson, Iowa, 1875 (1-0, 28), shortly after the Jerome Gambit's debut. 

The defense was subsequently played by William Carrington in the first game of his second match against the Mexican champion, Andres Clemente Vazquez, in 1876 (1-0, 34).

It should be noted that Vazquez played a match against Steinitz in 1888, and one against Blackburne in 1891. The latter match included two Giuoco Piano openings played by Vazquez, and it would have been fascinating - if downright risky for the first player - if one of the strongest players of the Jerome Gambit at that time had used it against the player whose crush of it against "Amateur" a few years earlier had covered the attack in ignomy. Alas, Vazquez opted for 4.0-0 both times.

7.Qd5+ Ke8 8.Qxc5 d6 9.Qe3 Nf6 

There are 186 games with this position in The Database, with White scoring a surprising 71%. This more likely reflects the comfort, knowledge and experience of the player with the White pieces, rather than an "objective" evaluation of the state of affairs. 

10.O-O Kf7

Black will castle-by-hand, bringing his Rook to the e-file.

White will urge his "Jerome pawns forward."

11.f4 Re8 12.f5 Ne5 13.d4 

13...Neg4

After enticing White's pawns forward, Black takes a swipe at his Queen.

14.Qb3+ Kf8 15.h3 Nh6 

16.Bxh6 gxh6 17.Nd2

Here we have a strange looking position, quite possibly even, with White's extra (and healthy) pawns and development balancing Black's extra piece and unsafe King.

[to be continued]

Jerome Gambit: Pinocchio

Like Pinocchio or the Velveteen Rabbit, the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) longs to become a "real" chess opening, or at least a "normal" one.

Of course, that is a bit of a stretch for something so often refuted.

Yet, occasionally, I experience a sense of "normality", as I noted a while back in my post "Still More Errors in Thinking 4.0"

I mean, I play a game, I publish it on this blog, someone takes that information and uses it in another one of my Jerome Gambits. I publish that game in this blog, someone else uses that information in another of my Jerome Gambits...

Not long ago, in "Jerome Gambit: Too Fast, Too Furious", I published a recent Jerome Gambit game of mine which featured an interesting 18th move. I had played the move a couple of years earlier, based on analysis of a game Bill Wall played 8 years ago. I found it curious that a third game was chugging along the same old tracks... (all wins for White, mind you)

I am currently playing an online game that follows all 3 of the earlier games, 17 moves deep, so far. I suppose that it is possible that my opponent is simply reflecting what I posted on this blog - in which case, it will be interesting to see which one of us unveils his "improvement" on the play first. (Especially since it is my only Jerome Gambit of this round in the tournament, and I am not likely to progress to the next round, for more opportunities.)  

Jerome Gambit: Centaurs

Recently Bill Wall sent me 16 of his Jerome Gambit games that were Human + Computer vs Computer encounters. Such teamwork is sometimes referred to as advanced chess, or cyborg chess, or centaur chess.

Over the years, I have posted games from Human vs Computer matches (including the legendary 1993 Fisher-Kirshner - Knight Stalker battles, and the rolling 2006 RevvedUp - Fritz 8 - Crafty 19.19 - Hiarcs 8 - Shredder 8 - Yace Paderborn mayhem) as well as many Computer vs Computer games, but I think this is the first centaur chess I have presented.

The results are interesting - even if it is difficult to assign the relative impact that the human had on the play. Also, the time controls, which affect the strength of computer programs, are not known.

Over all, White scored 4 - 9 - 3 (34%), which would be unimpressive for a normal opening under normal circumstances, but which seems - as with all Jerome Gambit matches - a bit "high" for a many-times-refuted opening.

A little more insight is available by breaking the games down into 4-game matches.

Crafty vs Stockfish + Wall, for example, yielded 2 wins for Black when played by the team; and, likewise, 2 wins for White when played by the team. With all due respect to Dr. Robert Hyatt's computer engine, it appears it could have been simply outplayed by its stronger computer opponent. Who played what color did not seem to matter.

On the other hand, the Komodo 5 vs Rybka + Wall match, which ended with a score of 2 - 2 - 0, was composed of 4 wins by Black. Neither engine, it appears, was able to ovecome the "handicap" of playing the Jerome Gambit.

The Hiarcs 9 vs Critter + Wall match seemed a reflection of the comparative strengths of the computer programs, as Hiarcs 9 lost 2 games as White, and could only manage a draw as Black.  

Interesting, also, was the Fritz 12 vs Houdini + Wall match. The team was 1 - 0 - 1 as White, and 1 - 0 - 1 as Black, suggesting that Houdini was the brighter computer program.

Looking at a couple of lines of play, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.d4 scored 2 - 5 - 1, while 6.Qh5+ scored 2 - 4 - 2, not much of a difference.

I will be sharing some of the games, taking a look at what "theoretical" enlightenment they bring. 
  

The Database Upgrade

I recently upgraded The Database with games from the online playing site FICS through August, 2018, bumping the number of games it contains to just above 59,000.

With almost 20 years of games from FICS, I have a pretty good representative sample (not just wins, but losses and draws as well) of how online club players play the kind of openings this blog covers.  

There are Jerome Gambit and Jerome-related games, including:

14,353 games with the Jerome Gambit, proper, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5, 4.Bxf7+ (White scores 46%);

2,614 games with the Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ (White scores 38%);

204 games with the Semi-Italian Jerome Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.0-0 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ (White scores 64%);

144 games with the Semi-Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.0-0 Nf6 5.Nc3 Bc5 6.Bxf7+ (White scores 65%); and

6,064 games with the Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4 4.Bxf7+ (White scores 56%).

In addition, there are some miscellaneous lines, including 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Na5 4.Bxf7+ (2,406 games, White scores 72%); 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.Bxf7+ (2,061 games, White scores 40%); and various reversed Jerome-style openings, e.g. 1.e4 e5. Nf3 Bc5 3.Nxe5 Bxf2+.

So, who plays the Jerome Gambit?

The player with the most games in The Database (White and Black) is DragonTail (1,452), although I note that his last game is from 2012. Likewise, kingmaple appears 619 times, but his last game is from 2010. yorgos has 600 games, but his last game is from 2014.

As for "active" players, Bill Wall now leads the pack with 842 games in the Database, followed by perrypawnpusher with 592 games - closely followed by drumme with 553 games and Petasluk with 521. I am sure that there are others not yet on my "radar" (e.g. ZahariSokolov with 331 games and rising quickly).

Jerome Gambit: Too Fast, Too Furious (Part 3)

[continued from the previous post]

perrypawnpusher - TobiasBrunner

"Let's Play ThChess e Italian Game" tournament

Chess.com, 2018 

27.Qb5+

An example of "patzer sees check, patzer gives check", but it turns out to be a good move.

27...c5 28.Qxb7+ Ke5 

29.b3

This is funny. I was worried about Black putting a Rook on b8, with an attack on my Queen and an x-ray attack on my b-pawn. More to the point was, of course, 29.Qf3.

29...Rg8

Samuel Johnson once said “Depend upon it, Sir, when a man knows he is to be hanged in a fortnight, it concentrates his mind wonderfully.”

I could see that my opponent planned to put his Bishop on the a8-h1 diagonal to complement the Rook's attack on my King. I certainly didn't want to lose a game after winning my opponent's Queen!

30.Qf3 Bd5 

This is what I had worried about - but, with the proper "motivation" I had figured out the solution.

31.Re1+ Kd4 

Or 31...Be4 32.Rxe4+ Kd5 33.Re8+ Kd4 34.c3 checkmate 

32.c3 checkmate

Just in time, too. The second round of the "Italian Battlegreound" tournament at Chess.com was about to start...

Jerome Gambit: Too Fast, Too Furious (Part 2)

[continued from previous post]

perrypawnpusher - TobiasBrunner

"Let's Play The Italian Game" tournament

Chess.com, 2018 

Striking back, the Knight that has been kicked around targets the Queen.

I have seen the retreat 13...Nc6 three times: perrypawnpusher - Heler, Giuoco Piano tournament, Chess.com, 2015 (1-0, 33); perrypawnpusher - apurv83, Giuoco Piano tournament, Chess.com, 2015 (1/2-1/2, 29); and perrypawnpusher - Hywel2, Italian Game tournament, Chess.com, 2015 (0-1, 44).

Stockfish 9 prefers the retreat 13...Ned7; there are no games with this move in The Database.

14.Qb3+ 

Delivering the check before Black can sequester his King at g8.

14...Kf8

Better than 14...d5 15.e5 (15.h3!? Rxe4 16.hxg4 Rxg4 17.Bf4 Bxf5 =) Ne4 (15...Nxe5!? 16.dxe5 Rxe5 17.Bf4 Re8 =) 16.h3 (16.Nc3!? Ngf6 17.exf6 Nxf6) Ngf2 (16...Nxe5 17.dxe5 Rxe5) as in perrypawnpusher-whitepandora, blitz, FICS, 2011(1-0, 64) 

15.h3 Nh6

Instead, 15...Rxe4 16.hxg4 Rxg4 was seen in Vazquez,A - Carrington,W, Mexico, 2nd match 1876 (1-0, 34)

16.Bxh6 gxh6 17.Nd2 

It is rather curious that Stockfish 9, after the game, now recommended 17...b6!? for Black, giving 18.Qe3 Qe7 19.Rae1 Bb7 20.e5 dxe5 21.dxe5 Nd7 22.Qxh6+ Qg7 23.Qxg7+ Kxg7 24.e6 Nf6 25.g4 as even.

Clearly the e-pawn is poisoned, but why is that?

17...Nxe4 18.f6 

This advance and offer of a "Jerome pawn" is the reason. After 18...Nxf6 White will double his Rooks on the f-file and swing his Queen over to the g-file. As is often the case, Black will be troubled by having his Bishop on its home square, blocking entry of his other Rook.

I wish I could take credit for the move, but I had already seen it in Wall - Vijay, Chess.com, 2010 (1-0, 22). Of course, I had already played it, then, in perrypawnpusher - Bunnywarrior, Giuoco Piano thematic tournament, Chess.com, 2016 (1-0, 20)

18...Be6

This moves seems to solve Black's problems at first glance, avoiding the tempting 18...Nxd2? which led to a crush after 19.Qg3!? in Wall, - Vijay, Chess.com, 2010. It also improves on my game against Bunnywarrior, which makes me wonder - was TobiasBrunner aware of that game?

19.Qd3 Nxd2 

The Knight grabs material, abandoning his King.

After the game, Stockfish 9 said something like "Bwahaha! White now has a checkmate in 12." I didn't have any idea at the time, but I knew that White was going to have a strong attack.

What could Black have done, instead? He could have (temporarily) protected the h-pawn with 19...Ng5, although 20.h4 Bf7 21.hxg5 Bg6 22.Qf3 looks good for White. He could also have tried 19...d5, although 20.Nxe4 dxe4 21.Qe3!? targeting the advanced h-pawn, looks dangerous.

Looking at White's f-pawn, I remembered the villains' line from various Scooby Doo cartoons, "And I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling kids"

20.Qxh7 Qd7 21.Qh8+ Bg8 22.Qxh6+ Kf7 

Now, 23.d5! would effectively block the Black King's avenue of escape, and he could only delay checkmate by returning lots of material.

I missed the move because, two pieces down, I was mostly thinking about - material.

23.Qg7+ Ke6 24.d5+

This certainly accomplishes the task of moving the King away from his defense of the Queen, but 24.Rae1+ would have provided more of an attack, and would have been stronger. 

24...Kxd5 25.Qxd7 

25...Nxf1 26.Rxf1 Be6 

Black has a Rook and a Bishop for his Queen (and a couple of pawns), and decides that he can fight on.

[to be continued]

Jerome Gambit: Too Fast, Too Furious (Part 1)

I was playing my last game in the first round of the "Let's Play The Italian Game" tournament at Chess.com when, suddenly, two opponents made their moves against me in new games. Apparently, the computer scheduler had decided that I would progress to the second round of play, even if I lost the first round game (I didn't; I won it) - so, there I was, with two second round games.

Somewhat disconcerting, each of my opponents was playing quickly - in fact, one of my games ended after a day of play, rather fast given that the time control was one move per day.

Still, I was willing to move with speed, too, as we were contesting a Jerome Gambit - in a line that I had visited several times before. (Alas, I lost the other 3 games, so no more "next" round for more Jeromes.)

perrypawnpusher - TobiasBrunner
"Let's Play The Italian Game" tournament
Chess.com, 2018 

 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 

7.Qd5+ 

Years ago, I labeled this finesse "a nudge". It is as old as Jerome - Brownson, Iowa, US, 1875 (1-0, 28). In a blitz game, it can get Black wondering what White is up to - using up precious time.

7...Ke8 8.Qxc5 d6 9.Qe3 

After the game, I put Stockfish 9 in "blunder check" mode to look at the game. Initially, it liked 9.Qc3 Qg5 10.Qg3 Qxg3 11.hxg3, with Black's advantage less than a pawn. That seems a bit silly to me, White moving his Queen 5 times, only to let it be exchanged.

According to The Database, I have reached the diagrammed position 83 times in my games. I must have learned something about the line.

9...Nf6 10.O-O Kf7 

Black sensibly prepares to mobilize his Rook, and possibly castle-by-hand.

A major alternative is 10...Ng4.The proper response is 11.Qg3!,and this is reminiscent of the series of posts I did a while back on "Jerome Gambit Secrets". A strong and experienced Jerome Gambiteer tried 11.Qe2, instead, and perished quickly: mrjoker - weiran, ICC, 2008 (0-1, 14). Another played 11.Qc3 and needed all of his Houdini-like powers to escape and turn the tables: Wall,B - Guest1660564, PlayChess.com, 2013 (1-0, 32). 

I have played 11.Qg3 with mixed results: perrypawnpusher - lorecai, blitz, FICS, 2011 (1-0, 14), perrypawnpusher - jgknight, blitz, FICS, 2011 (1/2-1/2, 49), perrypawnpusher - FiNLiP, blitz, FICS, 2011 (0-1, 59). For a couple of more modern examples, from stronger players, see Sheldrick,K - Bhat,V, Australian Open, 2017 (1-0, 20) and Morin,L - Weston,P, Quebec Open, 2018 (1-0, 54)

11.f4 Re8 12.f5 

I have been pretty successful with this thematic move (10 - 4 - 1), chasing the Knight, so I was surprised to see, after the game, that Stockfish 9 recommended 12.Qb3+!? instead. The Database has only one game with that move, a win by Black in 25 moves.

12...Ne5 13.d4 

Here, again, the computer prefers 13.Qb3+, followed by 14.d3, which seems to lock the Queen on the Queenside. (There are no game examples in The Database.) As we will see, Stockfish's preference is based on disliking Black's next move.

13...Neg4 

[to be continued]