Equality?!

Is the pawn that White gets in return for his piece in the "annoying defense" variation of the Jerome Gambit enough for equality? "Objective" modern theory would say no, but you could not tell that from the following game by Bill Wall.

Wall,B - Alaric engine
Palm Bay, FL, 2015

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 d6

The "annoying" or "silicon" defense. It limits White's attack, but it also limits Black's counterplay.

8.fxe5 dxe5 9.Nc3

For variety. The only game in The Database with this move was played by Bill's brother.

9...Nf6

Or 9...g6 as in Wall,S - Guest648596, PlayChess.com, 2013 (1-0,57). 

10.Qe2 Ke7 11.Na4 Qd4 12.Nxc5 Qxc5 13.d3 Bg4 14.Be3 Qb4+ 15.Qd2 Qxd2+ 16.Kxd2 Rhd8

The "Theory of Infinite Resistance" suggests that if White makes no further concessions, he can hold on.

17.h3 Be6 18.Bc5+ Kd7 19.Ke3 Nh5 20.Rhf1 Nf4 21.Rf2 g5 22.Bb4 Rg8 23.Bc3 Kd6

A plan for Black to convert his advantage appears to be byond the computer's horizon. On the other hand, White has plans for his "Jerome pawn".

24.b4 a6 25.a4 Rg6 26.Bb2 Rag8 27.c4 Bd7 28.d4 exd4+ 29.Bxd4 a5 30.b5 c5 31.Bc3 Ke7 32.Bxa5 b6 33.Bc3 Rd6 34.Rd2 Rxd2 35.Kxd2 Rd8 36.Kc1 Nxg2

The exchange of pawns on opposite wings has given White an opportunity. It appears that the Manhattan Chess Club epigram, mentioned by Irving Chernev in Capablanca's Best Chess Endings - "Black passed pawns travel faster than White" - will not rule the day in this game.

37.a5 bxa5 38.Rxa5 Bxh3 39.Ra7+ Bd7 40.Be5 Rf8 41.b6 Nf4 42.Kd2 Ke6 43.Bc7 Bc6 44.b7 Bxb7 45.Rxb7 h5

Black's passers look dangerous, but Bill has things under control, especially since he has recovered his sacrificed piece.

46.Rb6+ Kd7 47.Bd6 Re8 48.Ke3 Ne6 49.Bh2 h4 50.Rb7+ Kc6 51.Rh7 Kb6 52.Bd6 Ka5 53.Kd3 Kb4 54.Rb7+ Ka4 55.Ra7+ Kb3 56.Rb7+ Ka2 57.Be5 Rd8+ 58.Kc2 

The Black King's travels have resulted in nothing.

58...Ra8 59.Bc3 Nd4+ 60.Bxd4 cxd4 61.Rg7 Ra3 62.Rxg5 h3 63.Rh5 Rc3+ 64.Kd2 Re3 drawn

Jerome Gambit: Dealing With the Annoying

The opening line in the computer vs computer Jerome Gambit game, Stockfish 15 - Lela, 2022 (0-1, 69) mentioned in the previous post has an interesting history.

The line 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 d6 can appropriately be seen as the "silicon" or "annoying" defense.

The earliest game example with this position in The Database is D'Aumiller, A. - A.P., Livorno, 1878 (1-0, 19). Alonzo Wheeler Jerome played two uncompleted correspondence games against S.A. Charles in 1881, and defeated J.K. Zimmerman in a correspondence game the same year.

However, I started referring to the line as the "silicon" defense because computer chess engines have an affinity for it, including Alaric, Alfil, Bison, Comet, Critter, Demon, GriffyJr/Sr, Hiarcs, Junior, Knight Stalker, La Dame Blanche, Lc0, Talking LCD, Fritz, Rybka, Shredder, Spike and Zarkov. I am sure there are others.

It is also known as the "annoying" defense - because it is. (I recall MrJoker's concerns expressed in "Jerome Gambit: Time For A Sobering Cup of Coffee" a few years ago.)

The Database has 370 games with the defense, with White scoring 46%.

It dawned on me that, from the point of view of The Database, Stockfish 15 - Lela, 2022 featured the highest rated individual (human or computer) playing the Jerome Gambit against the highest rated defender. What was there to learn from such an encounter?

The continuation 8.fxe5 dxe5 seems clear, followed by 9.Qh3+ Ke7 10.Qg3 Kf7 11.Qxe5 - White has two pawns for his sacrificed piece, and nervous players might have already veered off and settled for a draw by repetition.

The further, 11...Qh4+ 12.g3 Qe7 13.Qh5+ g6 14.Qe2, looks like the kind of position that computers like to grind; in the game, 69 moves.

I have only one human vs human game with this position, and it is neither exciting nor encouraging - Wall,B - Guest3551214, playchess.com, 2013.

Certainly, I have to do more work here.

Is it helpful to consider going back to the original games for ideas? D'Aumiller tried 8.d4!?, instead of capturing the Knight. Jerome tried 8.Qh3!?+ and 8.f5+!? in his games with Charles, and 8.f5+!? in his game with Zimmerman.

Or, is it necessary to postpone f2-f4 until after 7.Qf5+ Kd6, according to traditional thinking?

Also, what about Yury V. Bukayev's modern 7.Qh3+ Ke7 8.Qc3 Bd6 9.f4 ? (For a lot to think about, review "JG: The New in Its Opening Theory, in Its Psychology [Parts 1, 2, 3, 5 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 & 11]"  and"Jerome Gambit: Analysis Leads the Way [Parts 1 & 2]" )

Jerome Gambit: A Recent Silicon Defense

There is something silly about the following game, not at all unusual for a Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+).

ILUVSACS - djh2075

2 1 bullet, lichess.org, 2023

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 d6 

I have called this line the "Silicon Defense" or "Annoying Defense"- a relative of the "Sillycon Defense" - as it has been played by many computer programs, going back to Knight Stalker (an early version of Fritz) in 1993, and including Alaric, Alfil, Andscacs, AnMon,  Bison, Comet, Fritz, Hiarcs, Junior, Komodo, Shredder, Stockfish, and Talking LCD. The earliest human game that I have in The Database is D'Aumiller, A.D - A.P., Livorno, 1878 (1-0, 19).  

8.fxe5 dxe5 9.Qh3+ 

Main line play for White requires a lot of exercise by the Queen.

9...Kd6 10.Qd3+ Ke7 11.Qg3 Qd4 

Black does not appear to be amused.

12.d3 g6  

However, this is a slip, as the game shows. Accurate was 12...Ke8. 

13.c3 Qd6 14.b4 Bb6 15.Na3 Be6 

Stockfish 15.1 evaluates this position as even.

16.Nb5  

A little bit better was 16.Nc4 Bxc4 17.dxc4 c5, although the related 16.Bg5+ Ke8 17.Nc4 Bxc4 18.dxc4 c5 would also be interesting. 

16...Qd7 

Hoping to eject the Knight.

17.Bg5+ Ke8 18.Qxe5 

18...a6 

Missing something.

19.Nd4 Bxd4 20.cxd4 Qd6 21.Qxh8 

The end has a hurried feel.

21...Kd7 22.O-O Ne7 23.Qxa8 Black resigned