Monday, October 31, 2016

Jerome Gambit: Light, Light, Light


I was looking in The Database for something light to share with Readers, and came across the following game. I am not quite sure what to make of it, except it is another example of the error of "if you sacrifice a piece on f7, I will sacrifice one on f2" thinking in the Jerome Gambit.

Technically, the game isn't even a Jerome Gambit... I need to expand upon my musings in the note to move 4.

Wall, Bill - Rube, 2013

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Na6 

Already I am not sure what to say. Is Bill's opponent a chess-playing program?

3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

Why not? The "Jerome Solution" is often a fun way to deal with surprises.


With a Knight on c6 (instead of a6) The Database shows White scoring 55% against this declination, which I find very odd, especially in light of the fact that The Database statistic for the Jerome Gambit offered - 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ - is White scoring 45%. This suggests that when White moves from offering a piece (or two) for a pawn (or two) to accepting a pawn, he only improves his scoring chances 10%.

5.Bc4 Bxf2+ 

Returning the psychological "shock" - but, here, White takes the piece.

6.Kxf2 c6 7.Nxe5 d6 8.Nf7 Qf6+ 9.Qf3 Qxf3+ 10.gxf3 Nc5 11.Nxh8

Black resigned

'Tis a puzzlement.

No comments: