Happy Birthday: Twelve months of blog...

Today marks the 1 year "birthday" of this daily-posted blog. Thanks for stopping by!

Many people have provided information on the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) and other openings for both jeromegambit.blogspot.com and my (unreleased) article on the history of the Jerome Gambit.

I want to express my heartfelt thanks to each of those who have helped, starting with the Jerome Gambit Gemeinde, of course, but including: Jude Acers, Deanna Austin, Kent Ball, Pete Banks, Teni Bedrosian, Martin Bennedik, Eric Bentzen, John Blackstone, Harold Bohn, Neil Brennen, Paul Broekhuyse, Stefan Bücker, J. Gayle Camarda, Franklin Campbell, Geoff Chandler, Adailton Chiaradia, Sarah Cohen, Coxsackie Historic Preservation Commision, Kristina Daily, Dan DeHann, Todor Dimitrov, Steven Dowd, Paul Dunn, Bob Durrett, Erik at Chess.com, Wayne Everard, Andrew Fabbro, Malcolm Farley, Steve Farmer, Ward Farnsworth, Micah Fisher-Kirshner, Sam Fore, Richard Forster, Ken Fraser, Steve Frymer, Kapil Gain, Gary Gifford, Scott Givens, Michael Goeller, Green County Historical Society, A.B. Hailey, Tim Harding, Keith Hayward, Jyrki Heikkinen, Dan Heisman, Adam Henderson, John Hilbert, Owin Hindle, James F. Holwell, Colin James III, Thomas Johansson, Fyhn Karsten, Ara L. Kaye, Paul Keiser, Libby Ford Kennedy, Rick Kinkaid, Tom Klem, Korch of Korch's Corner, Michael Kramer, Ty Kroll, Robert Kruszynski, Rosemary Kurtz, Gary Lane, Heather Lang, Stan Larsen, George Laven, Peter Lupu, Jeff Martin and the staff of the John G. White Collection at the Cleveland Public Library, Missi Matt, Tim McGrew, Hindemburg Melao, Anna Maria Mihalega, Martin Moller, Dennis Monokroussos, Louis Morin, Mark Morss, Robert Murnan and the staff at the Cleveland Research Center, Clyde Nakamura, Christopher Nelson, Anne Newman, Russ Newman, Jan Newton, Reg Nonni, Ryan North, William Paulsen, James Pratt, Tyrin Price, Tom Purser, Francesco Recchia, Marianne Reynolds, Peter Reuter, N. Earl Roberts, Magnus Rosenstielke, Tim Sawyer, Eric Schiller, Rainer Schlenker, Anne Sebba, Daaim Shabazz, Jeremy Spinrad, Peter Stockhausen, Susan Strahan, Jason Stratman, David Surratt, Joseph Tanti, Pat Tavenner, Anders Thulin, Randy Tipton, Toby and Traci at TobyChess, Attila Turzo, Cindy Ulrich, Olimpiu Urcan, Bill Vallicella, Jaap van der Kooij, Jeroen van Dorp, Vedder Memorial Library staff, Lissa Waite, Andrew Walker, Art Wang, Bill Wall, Brian Wall, Ken Whyld, Edward Winter, Peter Wong, Ed Yetman, Jack Young, Bradley Zang and Lev Zilbermints.

As a "birthday present" to all who are interested, I have put together a PGN database of over 1,100 games: mostly Jerome Gambits or Jerome-ish Gambits, with occasional forays into other unorthodox opening areas, as they have been touched upon on in the first year of this blog.

I also have .pdf files for the Unorthodox Openings Newletter issues #17, #18 and #21 for the articles "Jerome Gambit, or Jerome Gamble?" by Rick Kennedy & G. K. Gifford; "Jerome Gambit – Revisited," by Rick Kennedy; and "Nobody Expects the Jerome Gambit!" by Rick Kennedy; respectively.

Finally, it is possible to provide the first year of this blog as one file that can be viewed with a web browser, off-line – all of the fun, none of the bandwidth.

They are yours for the asking, with my thanks for stopping by to celebrate.

With a lotta help from my friend...

My "thank you" again goes out to N. Earl Roberts (see "Cha - ching!" and "Jerome Gambit: The Proper Perspective") who quickly noticed that the vast majority of entries in the third PGN file of games from this blog are computer vs computer affairs that start from a fixed position – and that such games are handled differently by ChessBase in its "Repertoire" function.

Using an editor, he therefore added the beginning Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) moves and the proper ECO code to each of those games.

Those who have received the earlier, unimproved version of the third file have been sent the updated PGN file.

Cha - ching!

N. Earl Roberts, whose comments on playability and refutation of a disreputable opening were reflected in the post "The Proper Perspective" is the first visitor to this blog to receive the third PGN file of games presented at jeromegambit.blogspot.com.

This file (plus the first and second ones of course) is available for the asking, although if you wanted to send along a Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) of your own along with your request, that would be really nice, too.

Or you could procrastinate until the next file is assembled – say, when 1,000 games have been posted (or referred to) here; we're already 3/4 of the way there!

The Proper Perspective

Recently Ty Kroll made a post at the Yahoo "Unorthodox Chess Openings" Group that caught my eye and which I think is well worth sharing.

He was writing in reference to "the Fishing Pole" (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Ng4!?), a Ruy Lopez defense variant that has been enthusiastically embraced by National Master Brian Wall.

The Fishing Pole has its critics, and, like the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) also has its refutations (although the 'Pole is not nearly as bad as the Jerome). Under the right circumstances, both can also be a lot of fun to play.

It was equally interesting to see a response by N. Earl Roberts.

First Ty,

I think there's a lot of fun, if nothing else, to be had in unorthodox lines which are actually bad.

I've been playing the line Brian dubbed "Tyler Hughes" in the 2 knights since he brought my attention back to it from this forum, in Blitz, and it's a lot of fun, but only because the opponents almost never respond with the winning variation for white, because they've never analyzed the line before and have probably never even seen it. I can even imagine such tricks working under slower time controls. It's the surprise factor.
I mostly play lines like that for the fun value, though. If I ever write anything about that variation (and I doubt it hasn't "all been written" already) it would start with the refutation because that's the best line, the correct line; that's real theory. All the fun I have with it in nearly every game would go in theoretical sidelines.
Writing any other way is a fantasy. I'd like to see all such lines addressed in that context. ... the fishing pole included if it is unsound.
I agree with Ty. Readers of this blog should be well aware of the many refutations of the Jerome Gambit. As more turn up, you'll see them here, too.

By the way, those with an interest in music, voice, and the occasional chess post might want to visit his blog at http://ne0romantic.livejournal.com/

Here I can follow up with Earl's post

As for the value of the "Fishing pole" itself, I actually agree with you that perhaps its value lies in its surprise, but I must point out that there is a vast difference between "playable" and "sound".
I am sure Mr. Wall does well believe that the "Fishing Pole" is playable because in those posts that I have seen, he clearly demonstrates that he is obviously the vastly stronger player....at blitz.
Here in lies the clear difference between the two, an opening is made "playable" by who it is used against relating to what medium it is used. Example, the original exclamation ridden game concerned. Mr. Wall clearly shows that over a ratings difference of around 300 points minimum (that's at a guess of the difference between 1700 and the master strength he clams to be) in a game of blitz, that the "Fishing pole" is quite playable.
The argument for it being sound on the other hand might well reduce with the rating difference coming closer together and game time being extending to a sensible length for proper consideration of moves.
Finally, refutations. Refutations are only relevant when people know them. I think Mr. Wall knows this and probably why he continues to play the "Fishing Pole" with such success in the bubblegum medium of internet chess blitz and good on him to, I am happy for him.
One of the curse of the internet Ty is people will always have an opinion and when it comes to refutations, people will always be there to line up with even more opinions... and in some way, that's not all together a bad thing.

Thank you, gentlemen.