Tuesday, October 21, 2025

Jerome Gambit: Who is Reading?

 


It has been a while since I checked, but it is always a bit of a surprise when I use blogger.com's information as to who is reading this blog.

Across the life of the blog, according to current data, readership has come from, and amounted to -

United States         581K

Singapore         443K

Hong Kong                     188k

(administrative region 

of China)               

France         106K

Vietnam                 103K

Brazil         100K

Russia         92K

Germany                 52.7K

United Kingdom 38.7K

All Others         432K


This is similar to a list (without readership numbers) that I gave much earlier in the life of the blog: in June 2012, the top countries were 

Russia 

United States 

United Kingdom 

France 

Brazil 

Vietnam 

Germany 

Canada 

India

Italy



Monday, October 20, 2025

Jerome Gambit Book (Part 5)

                               

Returning, again, to the book Jerome Gambit, for another walk in the park (or in the weeds)...

A note given to the game "N,N"* - Blackburne, [London, 1885] brings much to mind.

The first eight moves of the game were 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qxh8 Qxh4

9.d4

Noted in the post "Traps and Zaps",

An improvement suggested by Munoz and Munoz in the August 1885 Brooklyn Chess Chronicle, repeated by Fletcher in Gambits Accepted (1954) and Druke in the November 1987 Gambit Revue, to give some early citations. (Actually, the move is rarely mentioned, but see "A Closer Look (Part V)".)

To add more, from the post "Update: Old Dog Can Still Bite",

White's Queen-escape line is, instead, 9.0-0 Nf6 10.Qd8 Bb6 11.e5 dxe5 12.Qd3.

This seems a lot saner than 9.d4, e.g. 9...Nf6 (or 9...Qxe4+) 10.e5 dxe5 11.Nd2 Bxd4 12.0-0 Be6!? when there is plenty of madness in the position after 13.Nf3 (or 13.Qxa8 Bd5 14.Qc8 Ng4 15.Qxc7+ [15.Nf3 Bxf3 16.Qxc7+ Kg8 17.Qc4+ Kf8 18.Bh6+ Qxh6 19.Qc8+ Ke7 20.Qc7+ etc] 15...Ke8 16.Nf3 Bxf3 17.Bf4 Bxf2+ 18.Kh1 Qh3 19.Qc8+ Ke7 20.Bg5+ Kf7 21.Qxg4 Qxg4 22.Rxf2 Qxg5 23.Rxf3+ Kg7 24.Re1) 13...Bxf2+ 14.Rxf2 Qxf2+ 15.Kxf2 Rxh8 16.Nxe5+. The game is even, if White survives.

All of this serves as a prelude to a piece of analysis from Jerome Gambit.

[9.d4! Nf6 10.e5 (10.dxc5? -0.80/20 10.e5 2.77 is much weaker Qxe4+ 11.Be3 Qxg2 =/+ ) 10...dxe5 11.Nd2! Repels Qe4 + (11.dxc5? 0.15/20 60 11.Nd2 2.46 looks very tantalising, but Qe4+ 12.Be3 Qxg2-+ ) 11...Bxd4 12.0-0 +/- ] [ with the idea 9.d4 1.87/23 Bb4+ 10.c3 ]

As the book assigns a "weighted error value" to each player's play in each game, it seems reasonable to assume that the author used Chessbase 16 in evaluations, as that is the first version where that number appeared.

Clearly, 9.d4 is the strongest move. In fact, Stockfish 16.1 (37 ply) assesses it as the only move that gives White an advantage.

The first game in The Database in which 9.d4 appears is Marfia - Stelter, offhand game, 1964 (1-0, 19) - almost 80 years after it was recommended. (Further research might find an earlier example.)

Arguably 9...Nf6 is Black's strongest response, although 9...Bb4+ comes into consideration, as does the energetic 9...Qxe4+ and the unsettling 9...Bh3.

Now (from "Jerome Gambit: Snappy Ending")

Capturing Black's Bishop with 10.dxc5 could lead to 19...Qxe4+ 11.Be3 Qxg2 12.Rf1 which is looked upon with disfavor by National Master Bruce Pandolfini in his Chess Openings: Traps & Zaps (1989).

The analysis from Jerome Gambit, above, indicates that 10.e5 is "much weaker" (due to [10.]Qxe4+ 11.Be3 Qxg2 =/+) but does not say much weaker than what

I think the answer is 10.Nd2, recommended by Hindemburg Melao, in a 2003 internet article at www.superajedrez.com, in his notes to Amateur (Melao gave the name "Millner") - Blackburne, London, 188[5].

To date there are only 2 games with 10.Nd2 in The Database, one being perrypawnpusher - marvinni, Giuoco Piano Game, Chess.com, 2022 (1-0, 17).

Still, 10.e5 dxe5 is best followed by 11.Nd2, keeping the enemy Queen out of the e4 square (i.e. 11.dxc5? Qe4+ 12.Be3 Qxg2). Then 11...Bxd4 12.0-0 with an advantage to White - agreed.


*It was correct to simply write "NN", as this stands for "No Name", or Anonymous, or, in this particular case, as the player of the White pieces is also referred to, Amateur.

Sunday, October 19, 2025

Jerome Gambit Book (Part 4)


                                  

As a follow-up to yesterday's post, which reflects upon two chess games having the same moves, I thought it would be fun to present a game from the Jerome Gambit book that is an exact replica of what is likely the most famous Jerome Gambit game - Amateur - Blackburne, London, 1885.

Before we take a look, however, I would like to quote from my earlier article on the Jerome

Time suddenly ran out on the Jerome Gambit as the 1890s came to a close, with the publication, in 1899, of Mr. Blackburne’s Games at Chess, which included the game thereafter treated by most sources as the refutation of the attack

Amateur - Blackburne, London,  “about 1880” (notes by Blackburne) 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ I used to call this the Kentucky opening. For a while after its introduction it was greatly favored by certain players, but they soon grew tired of it (Blackburne) 4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 d6 Not to be outdone in generosity 8.Qxh8 Qh4 9.0-0 Nf6 10.c3 Ng4 11.h3 Bxf2+ 12.Kh1 Bf5 13.Qxa8 Qxh3+ 14.gxh3 Bxe4# 0-1

There are a few things wrong with the generally accepted view of Blackburne’s miniature. The game was published at least fourteen years before Mr. Blackburne’s Games at Chess, in the August 1885 issue of the Brooklyn Chess Chronicle. It was played, according to the Chronicle, “some months ago in London” – that is, 5 years later than the “about 1880” that Blackburne recalled. Such an error in memory, from someone who played thousands of games is, of course, quite understandable. 

In addition, the BCC article included suggestions – “he should have attempted to free his pieces by 9.d4 before castling” and “the only hope he had was 10.Qd8,” which would have strengthened White’s game considerably.

With all this in mind, let's continue with the modern game.

(By the way, the player with the White pieces is a bot at the online chess site, lichess.org.)


Mr_Chess_Berserk - Didnt-play-badly-br0

45 30 classical, 2024

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 

7.Qxe5 d6 

Blackburne's line, offering the Rook. 

8.Qxh8 Qh4 9.O-O Nf6 


Black has succeeded in - at least, temporarily - trapping White's Queen, and needs only one wasted tempo by his opponent to begin a winning sacrificial attack, crowned by a Queen sacrifice.

Let's finish this game, and then come back to this critical position.

10.c3 

Hoping to get in d2-d4, blocking the diagonal of the attacking Bishop.

10...Ng4 

Black strikes first.

Modern defenders against the Jerome Gambit have Blackburne's example to follow.

Modern attackers with the Jerome Gambit have to do a bit more work.

11.h3 Bxf2+ 12.Kh1 Bf5 

Offering the other Rook.

13.Qxa8 Qxh3+ 14.gxh3 Bxe4 checkmate


Beautiful play - but not as enjoyable for the first player.

Let's look at the "only hope" for White at move 10, as provided by the Brooklyn Chess Chronicle.

10.Qd8!?

Suddenly, Black has to be careful, and think clearly, as White is threatening to jailbreak his Queen. Still - Black has his other Rook to offer.

10...Bh3 

We can look at alternatives that leave White better - 10...Bb6, 10...Bd7, 10...g5 - at another time.

11.Qxc7+ 

White's resource is to check repeatedly, gaining a three-fold repetition of position.

Black has to allow the repetition - or repeat, himself - in order to avoid disadvantage.

11...Kf8 12.gxh3 

Or 12.Qxb7 Bxg2 (12...Qg4 13.Qxa8+ Kf7 14.Qb7+ Kf8 15.Qa8+ Kf7 16.Qb7+ Kf8 17.Qa8+ draw by repetition, forced by White) 13.Qxa8+ (13.Kxg2 Qg4+ 14.Kh1 Qh3 15.Rg1 Qf3+ 16.Rg2 Qd1+ 17.Rg1 Qf3+ draw by repetition forced by Black) 13...Ne8 14.d4 Qg4 15.Bh6+ Ke7 16.Qb7+ Kd8 17.Qb8+ Ke7 18.Qb7+ Kd8 19.Qb8+ draw by repetition forced by Black.

12...Qxh3 13.d4 Qg4+ 14.Kh1 Qf3+ 15.Kg1 Qg4+ draw by repetition


Related analysis can be found elsewhere on this blog, including "Updating the Blackburne Defense (Parts 1 & 2)"



Saturday, October 18, 2025

Jerome Gambit Book (Part 3)

                                                   

Regarding the newly discovered Jerome Gambit book, questions remain.

It is not unusual for two games to have the same moves, especially if they are short games. For example, how many thousands of times has the following game been played? 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Qh5 Nf6 4.Qxf7 checkmate.

So, it might not be odd for two games to mirror each other for 10 moves.

But, for 24 moves? That happens.

Okay, but for 39 moves? Surely that can't happen too often.

Consider the following game (s) from the Jerome Gambit book that we have been discussing (see "Jerome Gambit Book (Parts 1 & 2)". They can be found in the notes to the online rapid game Lovefully (2712) - BLITZ26 (2481), 2021 in the book.


1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 7.Qd5+ Ke8 8.Qxc5 d6 9.Qe3 Nf6 

Here, Lovefully veered off with 10.d3 against BLITZ26.

10.d4 Qe7 11.0-0 Ng4 12.Qe2 Qh4 13.h3 Nf6 14.f4 Nh5 15.Qf2 Qxf2+ 16.Rxf2 Rf8 17.f5 Ne7 18.c4 c6 19.g4 Nf6 20.Nc3 d5 21.e5 Nd7 22.cxd5 Nxd5 23.Ne4 N7b6 24.b3 a5 

At this point, the book had the notation "1-0 (72) Charmeteau,S (2292) - Guichard,P (2430) FRA-chT Top 12 2019 (7.6)" indicating that this game also went on to 72 moves.

25.e6 h6 26.Bb2 Ke7 27.Re1 Ra7 28.Nc5 Na8 29.Nd3 b5 30.Ne5 Kd6 31.Rc1 Ra6 32.Rc5 Bb7 33.Rfc2 Rc8 34.Bc1 a4 35.b4 a3 36.Bd2 Nab6 37.Be1 Na4 38.Bg3 Ke7 39.Nd7 Nxc5 

Here, there was the notation "1-0 (72) Deloras,B - Walker,M EST-ch Tallinn 1943" indicating the game length, too, was 72 moves.

40.dxc5 Rg8 41.Bd6+ Ke8 42.Rd2 Ra4 43.Rxd5 cxd5 44.f6 gxf6 45.Nxf6+ Kd8 46.e7+ Kc8 47.Nxg8 Bc6 48.Nf6 Rxb4 49.e8Q+ Bxe8 50.Nxe8 Rb1+ 51.Kf2 Rb2+ 52.Kf3 Rxa2 53.Nc7 b4 54.Nxd5 b3 

Jerome Gambit identified this as a win by White, in Charlick,H - Mann,J correspondence, 1881 - which it was, although the game also went on to 72 moves. 

In addition:

It turns out that Sven Charmeteau did play - Pauline Guichard in the  FRA-chT Top 12 tournament in Brest, France, in 2019, but their game was a Scotch, not a Jerome.

The only tournament that I could find to match "EST-ch Tallinn 1943" was the 11th Estonian Championship in Tallinn in July, 1943 (Di Felice, Chess Results, 1941-1946, page 126). The tournament was won by Paul Keres, and neither Deloras nor Walker were listed as playing.

Puzzling...

Friday, October 17, 2025

Jerome Gambit Book (Part 2)


[continued]

Examining the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) book (the cover says it is by "Chess Notes") that Bill Wall led me to, and which I first took a look at in "Jerome Gambit Book (Part 1)", has led to more puzzlement.

As mentioned in the earlier post, the following game from the book features "W So" playing the Jerome Gambit against "Delmonico" in the "N Eljanov Memorial final 6th 2021".

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5 +Kd6 8.f4 Qf6 9.fxe5+ Qxe5 10.Qf3 Nf6 11.d3 Kc6 12.Nc3 d6 13.h3 Qh5 14.Qg3 Be6 15.Ne2 Raf8 16.Nf4 Qe5 17.Qxg7 Bf5 18.Nd5 Nxd5 19.Qxe5 dxe5 20.exd5+ Kxd5 21.Bh6 Rf7 22.g4 Be6 23.O-O-O 

I suspect that if the reference is to Wesley So, an American grandmaster rated over 2750, if he had played a Jerome Gambit it would be notable, and it would have been covered on chess sites all over the internet - yet that has not happened. (Especially since Stockfish 16.1 assesses the final position as about 4 1/4 pawns better for Black.) I have messaged Mr. So about this, and will share his response.

Also, a search on the internet did not discover an "N Eljanov" or an "N Eljanov Memorial" tournament in any year, not just 2021. Ditto, checking Mark Crowther's comprehensive "The Week in Chess" website.

There is a Nils Delmonico, from Switzerland, but, again, had he beaten a top grandmaster who was playing a "refuted" opening, it would have been news. Likewise, any other Delmonico-named chess player. No news found.

Finally as previously noted, all of the moves are the same as in the game Alonzo Wheeler Jerome - S. A. Charles, correspondence, 1881.

Well, then...

[to be continued]

Thursday, October 16, 2025

Jerome Gambit: Blackburne Returns

 


I just heard from Pete Banks ("blackburne" online), early and longtime contributor to this blog and early member of the Jerome Gambit Gemeinde (modern)

He pointed out the video "Hikaru Is CRAZY! Sacs 2 Pieces In First 5 Moves & Annihilates 2600+ GM!" covering the game GM Nakamura - GM Kollars 3 0 blitz, Chess.com, 2020 (1-0, 28).

Previously, we have seen a wordless presentation of that game (see "Once Again: "Grandmasters Don't Play the Jerome Gambit" Blah, Blah, Blah!") but the video Pete mentions, by Square One Chess has excited narration that brings the game further to life.

Well worth checking out.

By the way, longtime readers of this blog are well aware of Pete, and might well remember 

- when International Master Gary Lane assessed the game Banks - Karmark, internet, 2007

- when he was mentioned in John Elburg's review of Gary Lane's The greatest ever chess tricks and traps (see "The extraordinary and forgotten Jerome Gambit")

- see "The Pete Banks Annotated Collection"



Wednesday, October 15, 2025

Jerome Gambit: Book (Part 1)

 




Bill Wall, whose games and comments have graced many posts on this blog, recently informed me of a book on the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) at archive.org.






It is a 61-page tome, in PDF form.

It is also a bit of a head-scratcher. 

The cover indicates the book is by "Chess Notes", although the first of that name that comes to mind is Edward Winter's "Chess Notes" - and I seriously doubt that this is Winter's work. I have emailed him about this, and will share his response. 

Many of the notes to the games within are by "Kitty Kat", otherwise unidentified. A Chess.com robot entity? I don't know.

Fortunately, none of my games are included, but it is odd that none of Bill's games are included, either.

There are games that do not appear in The Database, so I will have to update it.

One game given in the notes is a bit of a puzzler: 

So,W-Delmonico, N Eljanov Memorial final 6th 2021
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5  4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5  6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 Qf6  9.fxe5+ Qxe5 10.Qf3 Nf6 11.d3 Kc6  12.Nc3 d6 13.h3 Qh5 14.Qg3 Be6 15.Ne2 Raf8 16.Nf4 Qe5 17.Qxg7  Bf5 18.Nd5 Nxd5 19.Qxe5 dxe5 20.exd5+ Kxd5 (23)

The same moves appear in The Database, in 

Jerome,Alonzo W. - Charles,S.A., correspondence, 1881
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 Qf6 9.fxe5+ Qxe5 10.Qf3 Nf6 11.d3 Kc6 12.Nc3 d6 13.h3 Qh5 14.Qg3 Be6 15.Ne2 Raf8 16.Nf4 Qe5 17.Qxg7 Bf5 18.Nd5 Nxd5 19.Qxe5 dxe5 20.exd5+ Kxd5 21.Bh6 Rf7 22.g4 Be6 23.O-O-O Rf3


I suppose I should check with Wesley So about his Jerome Gambit adventures.

A deeper look into the book will follow.

[to be continued]