Jerome Gambit: The Improved Face Palm Variation?!

Having taken a look at what I called the "Face Palm Variation" of the Jerome Gambit, I wondered if there was an "improved" variation, where White played an early d2-d4, so that his Knight could safely move to g5 with the support of his dark square Bishop.

I quickly recalled the game Wright - Hunn, Arkansas,1874, played about a half year after Alonzo Wheeler Jerome published his first analysis of his gambit in the Dubuque Chess Journal. The game began 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d4 exd4 5.Bxf7+.

The line was referred to as The Macbeth Attack on the Italian language website Sacchi64. It has a relationship to the Italian Gambit, (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d4) as explored by Jude Acers and George S. Laven in their book The Italian Gambit and A Guiding Repertoire for White - 1.e4, (although they were not interested in Bxf7+)  as well as to the Lewis Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.d4) and the Von der Lasa Gambit, (1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.Bc4 Bc5).

The Database has 1,413 game examples, with White scoring 37%.

Here is a recent game. Beware: the tactics get out of hand, quickly. White (who has almost 700 games in The Database) shows a number of  practical choices to keep the clock at bay.

drumme - RikTheKing
4 0 blitz, FICS, 2020.

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.d4 exd4 

A bit stronger, according to Komodo 10, is 5...Bxd4, although the result for White of the 645 games in The Database was only 26%. 

6.Ng5+ 

By playing an early Bxf7+, White has avoided the Sarratt or Vitzthum Attack, although that's not necessarily a good thing.

6...Ke8 7.O-O h6 

Facing a gambit can be scary, and it's natural to want to kick at the attacking piece - but this dismantles Black's defense, rather than helping it.

8.Qh5+ Ke7 9.Qf7+ Kd6 

Black is now at risk for losing a lot of material.

10.Qd5+ 

White is not feeling very greedy, or perhaps in a 4-minute blitz game there wasn't the time (or need) to dig deeper: 10.Bf4+ Ne5 11.Bxe5+ Kxe5 12.Qxg7+ Nf6 (12...Qf6 13.f4+ Kd6 14.e5+) 13.f4+ Kd6 14.Nf7+ Kc6 15.Nxd8+ would have been painful for Black.

10...Ke7 11.Qxc5+

Grabbing the enemy Bishop, but it was stronger to play 11.Qf7+ Kd6 to return to the line given in the note above, 12.Bf4+ etc.

11...d6 

Do I have to do this all over again? 

Didn't I do it right the first time? 

Do I have to do this all over again? 

How many times do I have to make this climb? 

from Long Title: Do I Have to Do This All Over Again? 

12.Qc4 Ne5 

Black could have grabbed the Knight, and hung on: 12...hxg5 13.Bxg5+ Nf6 14.f4 Qg8 15.Qxg8 Rxg8 16.e5 dxe5 17.fxe5 Nxe5 18.Re1 Ke6 19.Bf4 Nfg4

13.Qxd4 Nf6 14.f4 Nc6 15.Qc3 hxg5 16.fxg5 Nxe4 

Well...

At first glance, Black seems to have played himself out of difficulty. Alas, it is actually a checkmate in 9, for White.

17.Qxg7+ Ke6 18.Qg6+ 

Now, interposing a piece will cost Black a piece. There wasn't time to suss out 18.Qf7+ Ke5 19.Nc3 Qg8 20.Bf4+ Kd4 21.Rfd1+ Kc5 22.Be3+ Kb4 23.a3+ Ka5 24.b4+ Ka6 25.Qf1+ Qc4 26.Qxc4+ b5 27.Qxc6 checkmate 

18...Kd5 

19.Nc3+

Again, development makes the most sense when time is short. Instead 19.c4+ Kc5 20. Be3+ Nd4 21.Qxe4 Kb6 22.Bxd4+ c5 23.Bxh8 was crushing. 

19...Nxc3 20.Qd3+ Ke6 

This might have seemed the safest choice, but it was not. 

21.Qxc3 

I am sure that after the game drumme found 21.Qf5+ Ke7 22.Qf7 checkmate 

21...Ne5 22.Qb3+ Kd7 

Black's uncomfortable King and extra piece is slightly outweighed by White's better development and 2 extra pawns. Although the players' fortunes now go up and down, White keeps the pressure on.

23.Bf4 Qe8 24.Rae1 Kd8 25.Qd5 Qc6 26.Qb3 Re8 

Note, for the umpteenth time, Black's light-squared Bishop at home, blocking his Rook. Typical defense-to-the-Jerome-Gambit "sin".

27.g6 Nxg6 28.Bg5+ Ne7 29.Rxe7 Rxe7 30.Bxe7+ Kxe7 31.Qf7+ Kd8 32.Qf6+ Ke8 33.Re1+ Kd7 34.Qe7 checkmate

Jerome Gambit: Worse vs Best (Part 2)

While I tend to refer to 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ as the Jerome Gambit, the name has been attached to other move orders, especially in earlier years. The issue often comes down to which aspect of the opening, the Bishop sacrifice at f7, or the Queen advance to h5 (after 4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+), the annotator is looking at.

For example, Joseph Henry Blackburne, in his Mr. Blackburne's Games at Chess (1899) refers to the Jerome Gambit a "the Kentucky Opening". He was clearly focused on the Queen move, as my posts on "The Kentucky Opening" Parts 1, 2, 3, 4 and "The Kentucky/Danvers Opening" [1.e4 e5 2.Qh5] argue.

On the other hand, some writer focus upon the Bishop sacrifice. Gerald Abrahams is, perhaps, the most extreme example, coming out of the Bishop's Opening rather than the Giuoco Piano, labeling 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Bxf7+ as The Jerome Gambit, despite no analysis or games by Alonzo Wheeler Jerome focusing on that line. See "The Abrahams Jerome Gambit" Part 1 & 2.

(For that matter, Alessandro Salvio wrote, in the early 1600s, about 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Qe2 Nc6/Nf6 4.Bxf7+, although White's Queen would subsequently go to c4, with check, instead of h5, to pick up the Bishop at c5.)

Similar is the Lewis Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.d4 exd4 4.Bxf7+, and the similar Von der Lasa Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4, 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+. Both, with their focus on the Bishop sacrifice, seem to have escaped the Jerome Gambit label, however, at least as I can tell.

Further extended are lines like 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d4 exd4 5.Bxf7+, arising from either the Scotch Opening or the Giuoco Piano. The earliest game that I have with it is Wright - Hunn, Arkansas, US, 1874, which in the Dubuque Chess Journal of November, 1874, was referred to as "an unsound variation of Jerome's double opening." It has also been referred to, later on, as "the Macbeth Attack". (Of course, the first 4 moves have been recently covered in The Italian Gambit and A Guiding Repertoire For White - E4! by Acers and Laven.)

Finally, we come to 1.e4 e5. 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+, which has been referred to, variously, as the Noa Gambit, the Monck Gambit - and, more recently, as the Open Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit. A closer look will probably muddy thing further.

[to be continued]

Fun With the Jerome Gambit

When recently discussing the "Macbeth Attack" I mentioned the early game Wright - Hunn, Arkansas, 1874, which appeared in the November issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal for that year. The game began 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d4, garnering the comment  "Brilliant but not sound" from the editor. (I suspect Jude Acers and George Laven, authors of The Italian Gambit and A Guiding Repertoire for White might challenge that "not sound" assessment.)

After 4...exd4 ("The German Handbuch gives as best variation 4...Bxd4 5.c3 Bb6 6.Ng5 Nh6 7.Qh5 O-O 8.f4 exf4 9.Bxf4 d6 10.Rf1 Qe7 and Black should win."), 5.Bxf7+ the editor commented "An unsound variation of Jerome's double opening." Still, he was able to join in the fun. After 5...Kxf7 6.Ng5+ he suggested that Ne5 "a la Jerome" is better than Ng5. That may not be "objectively" true, but capturing the imaginary pawn on e5 certainly is in line with the outlandish play of Alonzo Wheeler Jerome's creation.

I was surprised to find 40 games in The Database that, wittingly or unwittingly, followed the DCJ's suggestion. The following blitz game shows some of the fun behind the lighthearted suggestion.


SupremacyPawn - northug
blitz, FICS, 2014

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.d4 exd4 6.Ne5+ 

6...Nxe5 7.Qh5+ Ke6 8.f4 Nf6 

Black is having so much fun "punishing" White for his audacity of early Queen moves - well, you know how those things sometimes go...

9.Qxe5+ Kf7 10.Qxc5 

Black has quickly returned two pieces. He would do best to calm himself, rationally look at his new position, and plot a new strategy. Something like 10...d5 comes to mind, with either 11.Qxd4 Ne4 or 11.e5 Ne4 to follow, and despite his previous misfortunes, Black would not be worse.

Alas for the defender, he is sure that White has erred (a clear assessment that is out of date, however) and still can and should be punished for his transgressions.

10...Nxe4 11.Qd5+ Kg6 12.Qxe4+ Kf7 13.O-O 
Black resigned

The Macbeth Attack

I recently discovered a page on the Italian language website Sacchi64 devoted to what it calls "the Macbeth Attack" (after Shakespeare's "Macbeth") 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ which the site also refers to as "the Crazy Attack". It includes a file of 56 computer-vs-computer games in a 2013 thematic tournament.

This line was seen (by transposition) as early as Wright - Hunn, Arkansas, 1874, referred to in the November 1874 issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal as "An unsound variation of Jerome's double opening."

Sacchi64 also has a page on the Jerome Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ as well as a file of 56 computer-vs-computer games in another thematic tournament (from 2009). I am playing through them, and am pleased to see that a few of the computers appear to  have included the Jerome Gambit in their "books". As I noted in an earlier post

Given that the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) is not likely to be deemed "best" play for White by the analysis of any competent computer, any time the opening is played by a program, it is likely that the Jerome has been included in the opening "book".

I will share relevant games in future posts.

InstantChess

A recent internet search brought me to the online site InstantChess.com, where I discovered a player from the United Arab Emirates with the handle SA3OD who plays the Jerome Gambit - and who likes to play Bxf7+ in other circumstances as well. The following very exciting game, with another in the notes, gives an example of his style in lightning chess, which is defined by the site as 1 to 4 minutes per game. (Fast!) His opponent, Zmei Gorinich, is from the Russian Federation.

SA3OD - Gorinich, Zmei
lightning, InstantChess.com, 2016

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d4 

The Italian Gambit, highlighted in The Italian Gambit System (2006) by Jude Acers and George Laven. I love the comment on the move in the November 1874 Dubuque Chess Journal: "Brilliant but not sound."

I am still exploring the InstantChess website, and have found one (I am sure that there are more) of SA3OD's Jerome Gambits (also at lightning time control) against Gorinich: 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.d4 (this move scores 38% in 2,154 games in The Database) Bxd4 6.Nxd4 Nxd4 7.Qh5+ Kf8 8.Qd1 {TN} Nf6 9.c3 Ne6 10.O-O d6 11.Na3 Kf7 12.Bg5 Rf8 13.Nc4 Nxg5 14.Ne3 Kg8 15.Nf5 Bxf5 16.exf5 Qe8 17.h4 Nge4 18.g4 Qc6 19.g5 Nd5 20.f6 Nf4 21.fxg7 Kxg7 22.f3 Ng3 23.Kh2 Nxf1+ 24.Qxf1 Nh5 25.Kh3 Rxf3+ 26.Qxf3 Qxf3+ 27.Kh2 Qg3+ 28.Kh1 Qxh4+ 29.Kg2 Qg3+ 30.Kf1 Rf8+ 31.Ke2 Qf2+ 32.Kd3 Nf4+ 33.Kc4 a6 34.Kb3 b5 35.a4 bxa4+ 36.Rxa4 Rb8+ 37.Ka3 Qc2 38.Rb4 Rxb4 39.cxb4 Nd3 40.g6 Qxb2+ 41.Ka4 Qxb4 checkmate.

4...exd4 5.Bxf7+ Kxf7 6.Ng5+ 

This move is at least as old as Wright - Hunn, Pine Bluff, Arkansas, 1874 (0-1, 18).

6...Kf8 7.Qf3+

Next time he might look (if he hasn't already) at the goofy 7.Qh5 Qf6 8.Nxh7 Rxh7 9.Qxh7.

7...Nf6 8.O-O Ne5 9.Qb3 h6 10.f4

White is thinking: Attack!

10...hxg5 11.fxe5 Qe8

In a lightning tempo game there is not always time to catch subtleties. Here, Black should have first played 11...e3+, putting a road block in front of White's Queen, and then moved his own Queen to e8. After 12.Kh1 Qe8, White could not afford to capture Black's Knight with 13.exf6? - we will see why, shortly. 

12.exf6

White, in turn, misses his opportunity. He needed to play 12.Qg3! when he could then safely capture Black's Knight, e.g. 12...d6 13.exf6. The position would then be unclear, but probably balanced. Stockfish 7 gives the wild continuation: 13...Rh5 14.Bxg5 Qg6 15.h4 d3+ 16.Kh2 dxc2 17.Nc3 Qxg5!? 18.Qxg5 Rxg5 19.hxg5 Be3 20.g6 Be6 21.f7 when Black will eventually regain the exchange for his advanced c-pawn.

12...d3+ 13.Kh1 Rxh2+!

Nice. Forces chekmate. (Or: it should.)

14.Kxh2 Qh5+ 15.Kg3 Qh4+ 16.Kf3 gxf6 

Oh, no! With 16...d5 Black would threaten mate with ...dxe4. Time must have been short. Now White has 17.cxd3! and his defense would hold.

 17.Qxd3 d6

Yikes! White's slip on move 17 gives Black another chance to play...d5. The pawn two-step would help open the d-file, giving the second player strong play against the enemy King: 7...d5 18.Ke2 Bg4+ 19.Kd2 dxe4 20.Qxe4 Rd8+ 21.Kc3 Bd4+ 22.Kb3 Rd6 etc.

18.Nc3

Zeitnot. White's King could, instead, play 18.Ke2 as in the previous note, and survive because of the closed d-file. 

18...Qg4 checkmate

Fun!

Mysteries of the Jerome Pawns

I wish that I had won the following game because I solved the "mysteries" of the "Jerome pawns" discussed after move 20. Alas, I took advantage of my opponent's mistake and slid into a drawn endgame, feeling lucky... 

perrypawnpusher - chingching
blitz, FICS, 2011

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+

According to The Database, which I consulted after the game, up until now, chingching was 9-1 against the Jerome Gambit. However, every one of those games saw 5.d4 instead of 5.Nxe5+, so my move was going to at least give my opponent something new to look at. 

I was interested to see that chingching had also played 16 games (scoring 75%) defending an Italian Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d4, which transposed to the Jerome with 4...exd4 5.Bxf7+ (an idea as old as Wright - Hunn, Arkansas, 1874). Among the Jerome Gambit Gemeinde, DragonTail is the top practitioner of this line, and we have previously seen DragonTail - chingching, blitz, FICS, 2009.

5...Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6

7.Qd5+ Ke8 8.Qxc5 Qe7 9.Qe3 d6

10.0-0 Nf6 11.Nc3 Rf8 12.f4 Kf7

Continuing to castle-by-hand. Instead, 12...Ng4, as in perrypawnpusher - MRBarupal, blitz, FICS, 2010 (0-1, 31) is not as strong.

13.f5 Ne5 14.d4 Neg4

As often happens, it is tempting to harass the White Queen. I suppose this is because White's opening seems so artificial that certain allowances can be made in how Black responds. Still, 14...Nc6 was for choice, as White can now develop some initiative.

15.Qe2 Kg8 16.h3 Nh6 17.Bxh6 gxh6 18.e5 dxe5 19.dxe5

19...Qc5+ 20.Kh1 Nd5

This is a critical position for the game, as Rybka 3, in the post mortem, saw Black's last move as a blunder (recommending 20...Ne8 instead).

The point is that the "Jerome pawns", now connected and passed, work very well with White's heavy pieces after  21.Nxd5 Qxd5 22.Rad1

analysis diagram






See?

I admit that I still did not, and it took some work to see why Rybka saw White as more than a piece better.

For starters, White is threatening e5-e6 and f5-f6 which combine with Qg4+ in a mating attack. That suggests that Black's best retreat for his Queen will be 22...Qf7, even though that still allows White to play 23.e6.

If Black uses his Queen to blockade the forward pawn with 23...Qe7, then 24.Qe5 will force 24...Bxe6 25.fxe6.

If Black uses his Queen to blockade the trailing pawn with 23...Qf6, then White has a tricky combination: 24.e7 Re8 25.Rd8!? when 25...Rxd8 is met with 26.Qc4+ and Black has to either give up his Bishop with 26...Be6 or face the other advancing Jerome pawn with 26...Kf7 27.exd8/Q Qxd8 28.f6+ Kf8 29.Qc5+ Qd8 30.Qe3 Be6 31.Qxh6+ Ke8 32.Qxh7 Qf8 33.Re1 Qxf6 34.Qg8+ Qxa8 when White is up the exchange and two pawns.

Wow. That is so far over my head...

21.Qh5 Nxc3 22.bxc3 Qxe5 23.Rae1 Qf6

White's position is only a shadow of what it was 3 moves ago. His Kingside "attack" is also doomed to failure.

24.Re3 Bxf5 25.Ref3 Qe6

An odd slip by opponent, dropping a piece, when 25...Qg6, instead, would have sealed his advantage.

26.Rxf5 Rxf5 27.Qxf5 Qxf5 28.Rxf5 Rd8

We have reached a drawish looking endgame.

29.Rb5 Rd2 30.Rxb7 Rxc2 31.Rxa7 Rxc3 32.a4 Rc1+ 33.Kh2 Ra1 34.Rxc7 Rxa4 35.Rd7 Ra2 36.Re7 Game drawn by mutual agreement

For the record

I include this game "for the record" because it is technically a Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) game, by transposition, and because I'm one of the two players tossing the pieces around.

However, it is one of those devilish 3 0 games which rapidly became a comedy of errors as my opponent (rated 125 higher than me), behind in material, kept throwing things at me, while I – for once, ahead on the clock – picked my moves quickly, knowing the game wouldn't end with a checkmate, but with a flag.

I have identified a few relevant points in the game, but it is best just played over with the Chess Publisher feature – chuckling (or covering your eyes) the whole way.

ncis  - perrypawnpusher
blitz 3 0, FICS, 2009

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d4

The Italian Gambit.

4...exd4 5.Bxf7+

From the Dubuque Chess Journal, November 1874

An unsound variation of Jerome's double opening. Note that it is the P at Q5 that gives the second player such a wonderfully harassing position later in the game.

5...Kxf7 6.e5

My database has 26 games with this position, 18 of them played by DragonTail (White) with limited success: 5-13-0.

An alternative was seen in Wright - Hunn, Arkansas, USA, 1874 – the game referred to, above, in the Dubuque Chess Journal – 6.Ng5+ Kf8 7.Qf3+ Qf6 8.0-0 Ne5 9.Qh5 Qg6 10.Qe2 Nf6 11.Kh1 h6 12.f4 Neg4 13.f5 hxg5 14.Qxg4 Rxh2+ 15.Kxh2 Nxg4+ 16.Kg3 Qh5 17.Nd2 Qh4+ 18.Kf3 Nh2+ and won.

6...d6 7.Ng5+ Ke8 8.Qf3 Nh6

Better was 8...Nxe5, but the text, while new, is adequate. 

9.e6 Rf8

Or 9...Qf6.

10.Nf7 Nxf7 11.exf7+ Rxf7 12.Qh5 Qe7+ 13.Kd2 Bb4+ 14.c3 dxc3+ 15.Nxc3 Bxc3+ 16.bxc3 g6 17.Qb5 Kf8

Black is safely a piece and a pawn up, and actually overlooked a mate here: 17...Rxf2+ 18.Kd1 Bg4+ 19.Qe2 Qxe2. I'll stop annotating; there is little educational about my win.

18.Re1 Rxf2+ 19.Kd1 Qf6 20.Bh6+ Kf7 21.Qd5+ Be6 22.Rxe6 Qxe6 23.Qb3 Qxb3+ 24.axb3 Re8 25.Ra4 Ree2 26.Rh4 Rxg2 27.Rf4+ Ke7 28.Bf8+ Kd7 29.Rf7+ Ke6 30.Rxh7 Ref2 31.Ke1 Re2+ 32.Kf1 Ref2+ White forfeited on time