Pillsbury Razzle Dazzled

     An opening generally known as the Irish Gambit, Chicago Gambit or Razzle Dazzle is, as has been pointed out in a few forums, a terrible opening. Why sac a piece for a Pawn for only 2 tempos of development? The center will be countered rather easily. Never play it! That’s what they say. 
     One poster stated he thought it would be useful in blitz games as a surprise, but he would never play it in a long game. Another person wanted to know why people search for gimmicks to win games instead of relying on good old-fashioned hard work and playing decent lines, adding that the opening is a joke and white will lose if black plays properly. Another boasted that if you play it against him you’ll lose. 
     The opening begins 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nxe5. An apocryphal tale is told of the anonymous inventor of the gambit. On his deathbed, when asked what subtle idea lay behind the gambit, his last words were reportedly: "I hadn't seen the king's pawn was defended." 
     In Chicago in 1899, Dr. D. T. Phillips, a leading Chicago player of the day, played it against Pillsbury during the latter’s simultaneous display against 27 chess players and 10 checkers players. His chess score was +20 -2 =5 and his score at checkers was +7 -1 =2. 
     Dr. Phillips had white because Pillsbury conceded white on some of the boards. When Dr. Phillips played 3.Nxe5 it left both spectators and Pillsbury astounded. As was reported in the Brooklyn Daily Eagle, the gambit was “not altogether new nor sound and which has been variously dubbed the Irish, Chicago and Razzle Dazzle Gambit.” I am calling it the Irish Gambit because, as can be seen from the article, that name pre-dates the Chicago game. 

   The Razzle Dazzle was applied in the dispatches describing the game in which it was also stated that it was a new gambit involving the sacrifice of a Queen for a Pawn (sic!). Nobody believed the report and all it did was “emphasize the guileless innocence of the reporter who furnished this remarkable piece of news, for the possibility of the successful sacrifice of a Queen at so early a stage is too absurd for belief.” 
     The opening caught the great Pillsbury by surprise and before he knew it his King was under attack by all of white’s pieces. All of Pillsbury’s pieces were balled up around his King and technically there wasn’t any way for white to breakthrough and administer the coup de grace, plus there was still the matter of black’s material advantage. Still, Pillsbury’s position was pretty cramped and as Tarrasch wrote, a cramped position contains the seeds of defeat. 
     The Eagle article observed, the sacrifice “carries with it excellent opportunities for attack which, however, avail only against weaker players as a rule.” I have played this opening a few times in online ten minute games and have had decent success and not all of the players have appeared to be “weak.” The fact is, black has to be careful he doesn’t get overwhelmed!

Play Online Chess

[Event "Chicago Simultaneous"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1899.1.7"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Dr. D.T Phillips"]
[Black "Harry N. Pillsbury"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteELO "?"]
[BlackELO "?"]

%Created by Caissa's Web PGN Editor
{Irish Gambit} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nxe5 Nxe5 {It's hard to imagine black
playing anything else!} 4. d4 {On an old site called Instant Chess (which now
appears to be Lichess) back in 2015 I played 4.f4 Nc6 5.Nc3. My 1600-rated
opponent started playing horrible moves in an unjustified attempt at an
"attack", weakened his K and lost in a handful of moves.} 4... Nc6 {For
reasons that I cannot explain, in a half dozen or so online games nobody has
played the apparently better 4...Ng6. But is Pillsbury played 4...Nc6 who can
argue with him!? Besides white's next move, here I have tried 5.Bc4 which has
been met by 5...d6 (the correct move), 5...Qe7? and 5...Qf6? I also played
5.Nc3, but played d5 next move anyway, so there seems to be no reason not to
play 5. d5 immediately.} 5. d5 Nb8 {You'd think 5..Ne5 would be better when
Stockfish prefers 6.Nc3, but in one online game I played a 4-Pawns attack with
6.f4 and 7.c4. I had one online opponent play 5...Nb8 and I continued 6.Nc3
c6 7.Bf4 and black erred seriously with 7...Nf6 and after 8.d6 Stockfish
thinks black is slightly better because of his big material advantage, but in
the game he was bound hand and foot and things just kept getting worse and he
ended up losing in 25 moves.} 6. Bd3 d6 7. O-O Nd7 8. c4 Be7 {Pillsbury might
better have played 8...g7 here which would have made the development of his
K-side pieces smoother.} 9. Nc3 Ne5 10. Be2 f5 {This throws away much of ios
advantage and gives some K-side attacking opportunities.} 11. f4 Nf7 {On his
next move white misses his chance to annoy black with 12.exf5! and then if
12.. .Bxf5 13.g4! Bd7 14.g5. Black would still be better, but his K-side is
all tangled up.} 12. Bd3 fxe4 13. Nxe4 Bf5 {How can this nice developing move
result in the disappearance of almost all black's advantage? But it should
have! Better was 13...Nf6. White should have answered 13...Bf5 with 14.g4!
(again!) . After 14...Bxe4 15.Bxe4 15.Nf6 16.Bf5 intending 17.Be6 black is
struggling to get untangled so he can untilize his extra material.} 14. Kh1 {
Not bad, but neither is it good.} 14... Bxe4 {Eliminating white's only well
placed piece.} 15. Bxe4 Nf6 16. Bf3 {Wrong square. From f5 it could go to e6
and be a bone in black's throat.} 16... O-O 17. g4 {Necessary sooner or later,
but black's defenses are adequate.} 17... Nd7 18. Be3 {Stockfish is
recommending black play on the K-side with 18...g5 or even 18...Nh5 with a
substantial advantage. Instead, Pillsbury switches operations to the Q-side
and much of his advantage disappears.} 18... b6 19. Be4 Nc5 20. Bc2 a5 21.
Rf3 {Even more potent was 21,g5!} 21... Nh8 22. Rh3 {Still 22.g5! is better.}
22... g6 23. g5 {The weakening of black's K has resulted in white suddenly
getting some dangerous play.} 23... Qd7 24. Rh4 { Pillsbury now offers up the
exchange to prevent any shenanigans involving a sacrifice on b6 which actually
isn't a bad idea. The alternative was 24...Rf7} 24... Rf5 25. Qg4 {Taking the
exchange doesn't improve white's chances and he can always take it later, so
instead he continues his attack. Black needs to tend to the defense of his K
with moves like ...Bf8 and maybe ...Rf7, but Pillsbury doesn't sense the
lurking danger.} 25... Raf8 26. Qh3 Bd8 {To be honest, black has managed to
defend his K and white's "attack" on the K-side is at a standstill, and of
course there's still the matter of black's extra material. White now probes
the Q-side.} 27. a3 R8f7 {And it is precisely here that Pillsbury loses his
advantage. He needed to hinder white on the Q-side with 27...a4!} 28. b4 Nb7
29. Bd2 {Slightly better was 29.Bd4 placing the B on a more active diagonal.
But, as fate would have it black's next move results in disaster on the
e-file. He could have prevented is with 29...Re7 after which the chances
would have been equal.} 29... Qe8 30. Re1 {Now not 30...Qd7 when 31.Re6 is
winning.} 30... Re7 31. Rxe7 Qxe7 32. Bxf5 gxf5 33. Qxf5 Ng6 34. Rh6 {Things
have changed in an instant and now it's white who is winning. Over the next
few moves white's play is not as precise as it could have been, but it is good
enough.} 34... Nf8 35. Qd3 Qf7 36. f5 Be7 37. g6 hxg6 38. fxg6 Qg7 {White
should now transfer his R to f3 or e3 depending on the circumstances with
Rh3.} 39. Qf5 {Both players seem oblivious to the fact that the possibility of
...Qa1+ offers black some faint hope. For example, 39...Qa1+ 40.Kg2 Bf6}
39... Nd8 40. Rh3 Bf6 {The final error. Better was 40...axb4!! which baits a
trap. If white continues as in the game with 41.Bh6?? then 41...Qa1+ and
black wins! so: 40...axb4 41.axb4! Qa1+ 42.Kg2 Qa2 and black is still in the
game.} 41. Bh6 Qe7 42. Re3 Be5 43. Bg5 Qe8 44. Bxd8 Nxg6 45. Bxc7 {Pillsbury
resigned in this hopeless position. Nice play by Dr. Phillips!} 1-0