The D-word

Members of the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) Gemeinde do not play their opening "with a draw in hand," but to win madly, or expire trying. Still, there can come a time when the wisest course just might be to split the point, and leave conquest for the next encounter... The following game is a lot of fun to play over, from start to finish (use the chess publisher application at the end of this post, if you wish), but I want to focus on some positions in the middle game, where choosing "the better part of valor" might have a good choice for White. 

 

TWODOGS - Haroldlee123 JGTourney4 ChessWorld, 2009

Here we have a "typical" Jerome Gambit middlegame: a real mess. Black-to-move has a choice of two captures, one which will leave him a piece ahead and one which (apparently) will leave him a Rook ahead. A simple choice? Nothing is simple in the Jerome Gambit! 16...Bxe1 The wrong choice.

White's opening 4.Bxf7+ and Black's superfluous ...h6 and later exchange of his light-squared Bishop left some clear light-squared weaknesses around his King.

White now has 17.Qf5+ and after 17...Kg8 18.Qe6+ he can produce a draw by repetition. If Black should try 17...Ke8 instead, then 18.Qg6+ either again leads to a draw by repetition – or a calamity for Black.

This can be seen after 17.Qf5+ Ke7, when 18.Rxe1 leads either to checkmate or a pile of material after 18...Ne5 19.Nc5 Kd6 20.Nxb7+, etc. Any member of the Gemeinde would be proud of such a "swindle." Of course, after the correct 16...dxd4 17.Rxe4 White will have to keep up the pressure and look elsewhere for his salvation. 17.Rxe1 Nb4

A perplexing move, not only allowing 18.Qf5+ drawing as above, but also allowing the flashy 18.Bd6+ which also draws. White's response in the game, however, allows the routine capture of his Knight, and the magic is again gone. 18.Qg6 dxe4 The light-square weaknesses are still around the Black King, but White no longer has his Knight to keep check-blockers off of f6. 19.Rxe4 Nxc2 Well, yes, this was Black's idea, although there was certainly nothing wrong with 19...Nc6. However, now White has 20.Be5 when 20...Qe7 21.Rf4 Kg8 22.Bxg7 Qxg7 again allows White to repeat positions with 23.Qe6+ Kh7 24.Qe5+ for the draw. Black can try the alternative, 20...Qg5 but after 21.Qe6 White has the better game. 20.Qf5+ Right idea, wrong time. 20...Kg8 Instead of interposing the Queen with 20...Qf6, allowing 21.Qc5+ and 22.Qxc2, reducing his advantage, Black again allows the light-square repetitions and the draw: 21.Qe6+ Kh7 22.Qf5+ Kg8 23.Qe6+ etc. White, in turn, chooses to fight on – from a worse position. 21.Be5 d3 Black's advancing pawn will soon star in a whole collection of dramas itself, but for now the second player needed to first defend with 21...Qf8. 22.Bxg7 White is beginning to grasp the situation. The text move, indeed, allows a draw after 22...Qg5 23.Qe6+ Kxg7 24.h4 Qc1+ 25.Kh2 Rhg8 26.Rg4+ etc. However, White had more in the position: 22.Qe6+ Kh7 23.Rg4 Qf8 24.Qg6+ Kg8 25.Bxg7 Qf7 26.Qxd3. Black is temporarily a Rook up, but he will shortly need to surrender his Queen. 22...d2 This move should seriously scare White into going for a draw. For a moment, it looks like it does.

23.Qe6+

Okay: Now, after 23...Kxg7 24.Rg4+ Qg5 25.Qd7+ Kf6 26.Rxg5+ hxg5 27.Qxd2 White will have a Queen and a pawn to balance out Black's two Rooks. A complicated, but roughly even, game.

Instead, Black distrusts the passive Bishop sacrifice, and immediately falls into a doomed situation.

23...Kh7 24.Qxh6+ Kg8 25.Qxh8+ There is no need for 25.Qe6+ now. 25...Kf7 26.Rf4+ 26...Ke6 27.Qh6+ Kd7 Now 28.Qh5, guarding against the passed pawn Queening (if 28...Kc8, 29.Rf8) and preparing to finish up the King, looks like the proper reward for White's fighting spirit. Unfortunately, he has a worried eye on Black's passer, and decides that "more checks to the King" is the answer. It is not – but the excitement is hardly over.

28.Rf7+ Kc8 Black can afford to allow his Queen to be pinned to his King: he plans on getting another one. 29.Qe6+ Kb8 30.Kh2 d1Q Black has travelled far from his "doomed situation" mentioned in the note to White's 23rd move. He figures from here on out, it's just a matter of technique.

It is – but it has to be proper technique.

31.Rf8 a6 What was called for was something that ends the clutter, something like 31...Qxf8 32.Bxf8 Qd8. Black's move, however, lets loose the chaos again. White now has the remarkable 32.Qe7, after which, despite being a Queen down, he can enforce the draw, obtain a better position, or checkmate Black: 32...Ka7 ( 32...Qc8 33.Rxc8+ Kxc8 34.Qf8+ Qd8 35.Qf5+ Qd7 ( 35...Kb8 36.Qxc2 +-) 36.Qf8+ Qd8 37.Qf5+ draw) 33.Qc5+ b6 34.Rxd8 Rxd8 35.Qxc7+ Ka8 36.Qc6+ Ka7 37.Qc7+ draw Amazing! 32.Rxd8+ Aquiescing to the loss. Well, not exactly: White still has a handful of "Jerome pawns" and decides to put them to use. Still, thirty moves later White resigned.

Is there any wonder why the Jerome Gambit still fascinates me??

Debut Vazquez

Here are two selections from the British Chess Magazine, from the January and February 1892 issues, concerning Andres Clemente Vazquez, an early member of the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) Gemeinde, recently spotlighted on this blog for his 1891 match with J.H. Blackburne (see "Alas, it was not meant to be").

Senor A.C. Vazquez, in La Strategie, says that after ten or fifteen years of conceding odds in Mexico, he as acquired some practice of the game. Experience has showed him the necessity of avoiding the exchanging of pieces from the commencement of the game, until, in short, the inferior player commits himself. The following variation, he believes, fills the bill. With it he has accomplished excellent results in Havana. It was designated by the late Captain Mackenzie, a "Terrible Opening."

(Remove White's Queen Knight)
1.c3 e5
2.Qc2 d5
3.d3 Nf6
4.Bd2 c5
5.0-0-0 Qa5
6.Kb1 Nc6
7.h3 Be6
8.e3 Be7
White proceeds 9.g4.

Variation :–
5...Nc6 6.f4 Bd6 7.g3 0-0 8.e4 Qc7 9.f5, &c.

In both cases, says the writer, White has a good position for attack, always reckoning the inferiority of the opponent. The "Debut Vazquez" is singular in this, that on [sic] matter what Black plays, White can always make the first five moves given above. Senor Vazquez hopes that the masters will analyze this opening and make their opinions known – Baltimore Sunday News

In our January number it was stated (p.11), on the authority of the Baltimore Sunday News, that the first player, conceding the odds of Q Kt, can always make the five following moves, whatever Black may reply :– 1.c3, 2.Qc2, 3.d3, 4.Bd2, 5.0-0-0. "East Marden," however, suggests for Black :– 1.e6, 2.Qf6, 3.Bc5, 4.Qxf2+ (no castling for White now!), 5.Qxf1, 6.Qxg2, 7.Qxh1! and White's game is hopeless. Senor Vazquez, who proposes the opening, would of course alter his tactics at the fourth move to avoid the impending catastrophe. All that is asserted is it is incorrect to say that the five moves can in all cases be played.

To play chess well

From the February 1900 issue of the British Chess Magazine

Game Department

The Openings - A correspondent writes to us that he has carefully gone through Mr. Blackburne's lately published book [Mr. Blackburne's Games at Chess], and he finds that in nearly every game won by Mr. Blackburne, from weaker opponents, the loser had really a lost game, theoretically, somewhere about the tenth move in the game, and in many games even earlier. We cannot say whether this be so or not, as we have not had the leisure to play all the games over, but we incline to the belief that our correspondent's conclusion is pretty nearly correct. Our own experience is that at least 90 per cent of games played between experts and inexperienced amateurs are practically lost by the amateurs before they have made a dozen moves. To play chess well, a fair knowledge of the openings is absolutely essential. The chess player who tries to construct his game on a faulty opening, is like the architect who builds his edifice on a rotten foundation. Both are bound to collapse to well-directed pressure. Moral: look to your theory, and beware of the individual who ostentatiously tells you, as if it is something to be proud of, that he knows nothing of the openings. If you search him, it is more than likely you will find him possessed of a pocket edition of the chess openings, to which he refers much oftener than to his bible or prayer-book – Hereford Times

Alas, it was not meant to be...

The March 1891 issue of The International Chess Magazine carried news of a 6-game match in Havana, Cuba between Joseph Henry Blackburne and Andres Clemente Vazquez, from March 5 to March 11.


Vazquez, current Mexican Consul General in Cuba, was an early advocate of the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+). The past and future Mexican Chess Champion's handicap game in 1876 against Giraudy was introduced in the November 1876 issue of the American Chess Journal with some fanfare

Odds givers will also find the Jerome Gambit a summary method for disposing of the neophyte. And by the way, we observe that this new opening has found its way to Mexico – An American idea in the halls of the Montezumas. Signor Andres Clemente Vazquez, the Mexican Champion and editor of La Estrategia Mexicane, has been trying the "Double" [Jerome's Double Gambit] on an amateur at the odds of Queen's Rook, and that, too, with brilliant success, as will be seen by the following game, which we copy from La Estrategia.

In 1876 Vazquez was 3-0 with the Jerome Gambit in his second match against William Harrington, games he included in his book of that year, Algunas Partidas de Ajedrez.


Of note is that in his third edition of Analisis del juego de ajedres (1889) Vazquez included (along with the Giraudy game and a Harrington game) analysis of Blackburne's 1885 crushing defeat of the Jerome Gambit played by an amateur (for the game, see "Nobody expects the Jerome Gambit!", "Flaws (Part I)" and "Flaws (Part II)").

After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qxh8 Qh4 9.0-0 Nf6 in the Blackburne game, Vazquez suggested that instead of 10.c3 White should have played 10.Qd8, and after 10...Bb6 11.e5 dxe5 12.Qd3 White would have had the better game. (This is the earliest incidence of this analysis that I have seen; Munoz and Munoz, in reporting the Anonymous - Blackburne game in the August 1885 Brooklyn Chess Chronicle, had simply suggested 10.Qd8)

So, in the 4th game of the Blackburne - Vazquez match, with The Black Death leading two games to one, Vazquez had the White pieces and played: 1.e4 e5

In the second game of the match Blackburne had dodged with 1...c6, a Caro-Kann.

2.Bc4 Nc6

Best authorites recommend here 2...Nf6 wrote Steinitz.

3.Nf3 Bc5

The Italian Game! And now... and now... the Jerome Gambit???

And now Vazquez moved 4.0-0 and played a delayed Evans Gambit after 4...Nf6 with 5.b4.... He was checkmated in 40 moves.

The position after the third move again arose in the 6th game, with Blackburne leading the match 4-1, and Vazquez transposed to the pacific Four Knights Game with 4.0-0 Nf6 5.Nc3, losing in 33 moves.

Alas, a Jerome Gambit game was not to be.


(It is interesting to note that Mr. Blackburne's Games at Chess, published in 1899, has the more straight-forward move order for the 4th match game: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5, etc. On the other hand, P. Anderson Graham, in his summary of "Mr. Blackburne's Successes" in the same book, refers to Vazquez as the champion of Brazil!)

Fifteen Games to Go: Much Unsettled

With only 15 of the games in the 15-player, double-round robin Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) Thematic Tournament at ChessWorld left to be completed, the Jerome Gambit has scored an almost-credible 39%.

The tournament leader Piratepaul (20 points out of 25 games completed) has 9 points from the Jerome. Second place is held by Sir Osis of the Liver (19 points out of 28 games completed), who has 8 points from the Gambit.

stampyshortlegs (18.5 points out of 24 games) is in third place, with 8.5 points from the Jerome Gambit .

Fourth place is occupied by DREWBEAR 63 (17 points out of 28 games, 7 JG points); fifth by GladtoMateYou (16 points out of 27 games, 8 JG points); and sixth by LukeWarm (15 points out of 28 games, 3 JG points).

Not Playing the Jerome Gambit Either

Yesterday's post was enjoyable enough that it was worth looking up another, similar, game in which the first player did not play the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+). Again, Jerome-ish themes echo throughout.

Samuels,L - McCudden,J

Metropolitan Chess League NY, 1925

Notes by Arnold S. Denker unless otherwise indicated, from his "Miniature Games" column in the January 1935 Chess Review (translated from descriptive to algebraic notation)

1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nc6 3.d3 Na5?

4.Bxf7+

4...Kxf7 5.Qh5+ Ke6

If 5...g6 6.Qxe5 winning back the piece with a winning position.

[Obviously Denker expected Black to protect his Rook. Otherwise he would have looked at 6...Nc6 7.Qxh8 h6 8.Bxh6 Bxh6 9.Qh7+ Bg7 10.Nf3, a line Michael Goeller suggested over 70 years later – see "Eric Schiller Doesn't Play the Jerome Gambit". With a Rook and three pawns against two Bishops, White would have a slight edge rather than "a winning position." – RK]

6.Qf5+ Kd6 7.d4

[As we've seen in Schiller - Shipman, New York 1981, 7.f4 was the stronger pawn move – RK]

7...Nc6

8.dxe5+ Kc5

Forced. If 8...Nxe5 9.Bf4 Qf6 [and here Denker wrote "10.Kt-B3!" It is unclear if he meant 10.Nc3! or 10.Nf3! Actually 10.Bxe5+ Qxe5 11.Qxf8+ was the strongest continuation – RK]

9.Be3+ Kb5 10.Qh5


10.e6+ d5 11.exd5 Nb4 12.d6+ Ka6 would also win, but the text move is much finer and wins in shorter order with the continuation Qe2+.

[In response to 10...e6+ Rybka 3 suggests 10...Ka6 11.Nc3 b6 12.0-0-0 Nf6 with a slight edge to Black – RK)

10...Na5 11.Nc3+ Kc6 12.e6 d5

If 12...dxe6 13.Qb5+ Kd6 14.Bc5+ Ke5 15.Be7+ wins the Queen

13.exd5+ Kd6
White now mates in two.

14.Nb5+ Ke7 15.Qf7 checkmate

Eric Schiller Doesn't Play the Jerome Gambit

American author and FIDE Master Eric Schiller doesn't play the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+). Despite his interest in unusual opening lines, he has spent far more time providing the club player with refutations of the Jerome.

His 2003 (with John Watson) Survive and Beat Annoying Chess Openings has a chapter on "Bashing the Jerome Gambit," which would be something akin to "Weapons of Mass Destruction versus the Mosquito" if it didn't at least shine a light on the poor, neglected creation of Alonzo Wheeler Jerome.

Still, as a followup to my two posts on Adolf Albin and the Jerome Gambit (see Part 1 and Part 2), I was wandering through my database when I came across the following game. There's at least a slight resemblance in the play to, well, you know...

Schiller - Shipman
New York, 1981

1.e4 Nc6 2.Bc4 e5 3.d3 Na5


4.Bxf7+
International Master Gary Lane (author of a couple of books on the Bishop's Opening), in one of his Opening Lanes columns at ChessCafe, wrote, in response to a reader who had asked about this line

I wanted to dismiss this bishop sacrifice, but in the spirit of the King's Gambit, I had to see what happens. I was surprised to realize that White is doing very well.

Michael Goeller (maintaining the best online resource for the Bishop's Opening), in his article on "The Hamppe - Meitner Motif" (see "Hamppe -Meitner Revealed" as well as "Godfather of the Jerome Gambit?" Part I, Part II, Part III, and Endnote) for the Kenilworth Chess Club website is more assertive, noting

If White does not have this move it's hard to see how he might even try to gain the advantage.

4...Kxf7 5.Qh5+ Ke6
Of course, the Jerome-ish 5...g6 was an option for Black, but not a particularly good one.

White plays 6.Qxe5 attacking the knight and rook, when 6...Bb4+ 7.Bd2 Nf6 8.Bxb4 is just very good for White – LaneInteresting, but ultimately unsatisfactory, is 5...g6!? 6.Qxe5 Nc6 7.Qxh8 h6 8.Bxh6! (8.Qc3?? Bb4! points up how much difference d3 for White can make!) 8...Bxh6 (8...Nxh6 9.Nc3) 9. Nf3 and White's Queen will not be trapped, meaning White retains a slight material edge and the safer King – Goeller

6.Qf5+

White has a much simpler alternative here: 6.Nf3! Qf6 (6...Nc6? 7.Ng5+ Ke7 8.Qf7+) 7.Ng5+ Ke7 8.Nc3 c6 and White wins back his material with advantage by 9.b4 or 9.Nxh7!? – Goeller
Instead, 6.Nf3 is met by 6...d6! and this simple way to deal with the threat against the e5-pawn 7.Ng5+ Kd7 8.Nf7 Qe8 9.Qf3 Nf6 10.Nxh8 Be7 slightly favors Black because he has two pieces for the rook, but 11.d4 is interesting since the king is misplaced on d7 – Lane

6...Kd6 7.d4

It appears that Schiller wished (mistakenly) to transpose directly to Hamppe - Meitner, but he thus missed his chance to turn White's extra tempo to advantage – Goeller

The move 7.f4 is stronger, according to Goeller and Lane ("The chase is on and White is in hot pursuit of the king").
7...Kc6 8.Qxe5 d5
9.exd5+ Kb6

Black can play for the win with 9...Qxd5! 10.Qe8+ Bd7!! 11.Qxa8 Nf6 12.Qxa7 (12.Nc3 Qxg2 13.Be3 Nc4 14.O-O-O Nxe3 15.fxe3 Qxh1) 12...Qxg2 13.Qxa5 Qxh1 14.d5+ Nxd5 15.Qa4+ Kb6 16.Qxd7 Qxg1+ 17.Ke2 Qxc1 18.Qxd5 Bc5. The text move should also favor Black, but it is much less clear – Goeller

10.Nc3 Qe7 11.Na4+ Kb5 12.Nc3+
Here 12.b3 was the move to draw.

12...Kb6
There was more in 12...Ka6.
13.Bf4 Bf5 Drawn

If Black had wanted to play for a win, he might have tried 13...Nc4!. It remains unclear to me whether this was a pre-arranged draw gone wrong or a real contest – Goeller