Jerome Gambit: A Club Player's Opening (Part 1)

I have been looking over my old (30+ years) score sheets, and checking out the openings they contain.

I played the Four Knights Game, and the Reversed Four Knights Game.

Against the Sicilian Defense, I did not risk facing the Najdorf or Dragon - I played the Wing Gambit 2.b4, if I were feeling adventurous, and the Snyder, 2.b3, if I were feeling cautious.

In fact, I played 2.b3 against both the Caro Kann and the French Defenses, as well, regardless of how I was feeling.

Likewise, against 1.e4 I played the French Defense, if I were feeling cautious, or the Latvian Gambit, if I were feeling adventurous.

All of the games were examples of a club player, choosing a club player's opening, in a club tournament.

None of the games were played at bullet, blitz, or even rapid, time controls. They were slow games.

I make these distinctions because today some adventurous club players dive into blitz games with their opening weapons, and use them to help navigate the dangers of the whirlpools they encounter. 

So - the following game is one such example. 

The weapon is the Jerome Gambit.

The game is not mine, but by a chessfriend who is willing to try the opening.

(The comments are mine.)

[If you insist on looking for grandmaster Jerome Gambit games, use the Search box on the right for "Hambleton" or "Nakamura".]

keegers2 - Tagkinho

10 0 rapid, lichess.org, 2026

1.e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4... Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 

The lichess.com annotation - by Stockfish 19? - is that Black's move is a mistake; that 6...Ke6 is best (and the example it gives as an alternative is that of the "Annoying Defense").

I suppose that if I were rated 3300+, like Stockfish, I would be critical of 6...g6, too, although, through human eyes, it is a perfectly fine response to White's check - as are 6...Ke6, 6...Kf8, and 6...Ng6.

7.Qxe5 Qe7

 Whistler's defense, quite strong and suggesting that Black is familiar with the Jerome Gambit.

8.Qd5+

Suggesting that White is familiar with Yury V. Bukayev's explorations of this move in "Anatoly Karpov & Jerome Gambit (Parts 7 & 8) "and "JG: The New in Its Opening Theory, in Its Psychology (Part 16)" 

Good for keegers2!

8...Kf8 9.Nc3 

Here, the computer suggests the novelty 9.b4, which I do not understand at all. In fact, the whole line of  play it gives is above my club player head: 9....Bxb4 10.O-O [Um, sure, but doesn't the dark square Bishop go to b2, now, instead?] h5 [Development, anybody?] 11.Qb3 [Preparing for Nc3, without having to worry about doubled pawns if ...Bxc3, right?] b6 [Staying away from 11...Qxe4 12.Nc3 Bxc3 13.Qxc3 Rh7 14.Qxc7 Qc6, right?] 12.d4 Ba6 13.c4 c5 

Fortunately, it wasn't me playing White.

10.Qd3 

10...d5

Black plays a thematic move - and the computer frowns.

"Ke8 was best" it opines. 

I'm not even going to argue; Tagkinho's move looks fine to me.

11.O-O

Safety - not pawn-grabbing (11.Nxd5 Nxd5 12.Qxd5) - first.

11...dxe4 12.Qg3 

About White's last move, to quote the robot in the 1960s TV series "Lost in Space": Danger, Will Robinson!

Okay, so keegers2 is playing the White pieces, not Will Robinson, but you get my point, right?

[to be continued]

Jerome Gambit: Game Over

I have expressed it a number of ways, but the fact is that White wins in the Jerome Gambit only if he receives some help from his opponent (or his opponent's clock).

The first player goes ahead, making strong, thematic moves - until something in the defense cracks.

If it doesn't?

Then it's "Game Over" for White.

perrypawnpusher - Macavity474

"Italian Game" tournament, Chess.com, 2026

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

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Kf8 

Against this retreat, The Database shows that I have had 70 games, scoring 71%.

7.Qxe5 d5 8.d4 

Not quite as good: 8.Qxd5 Qxd5 9.exd5 Bd6 10.d4 Nf6 11.c4 Be7 12.Nc3 a5 13.Bf4 Bg4 14.f3 Ra6 15.fxg4 Nxg4 16.O-O Rb6 17.Bxc7+ Rf6 18.Rxf6+ Bxf6 19.d6 Rg8 20.d7 Bxd4+ 21.Kf1 Ke7 22.d8=Q+ Rxd8 23.Bxd8+ Kxd8 24.Re1 Bxc3 25.bxc3 a4 26.h3 Nf6 27.Re5 Kd7 28.Ra5 b6 29.Rxa4 Kc8 30.Ra7 Kb8 31.Rxg7 b5 32.cxb5 Ne4 33.Rxh7 Nd6 34.a4 Ne4 35.g4 Nxc3 36.g5 Nxa4 37.g6 Nc5 38.g7 Ka7 39.g8=Q+ Kb6 40.Rh6+ Kxb5 41.Rh5 Ka5 42.Rxc5+ Kb6 43.Qc4 Kb7 44.Qb4+ Ka6 45.Ra5 checkmate, perrypawnpusher - Jaime Jaquez Jr. Bot, Chess.com, 2024 

8...Bb6 9.Bg5 Qd6 10.exd5 Qxe5+ 11.dxe5 

White has 3 pawns for a piece (and a beautiful pawn center), but Stockfish 16.1 is not impressed, seeing Black (30 ply) as almost 3 pawns better.

11...Bd4 12.c3 Bxe5 13.Nd2 Bf5 14.Nc4 Bf6 15.Bf4 Re8+ 16.Ne3 Be5

17.O-O 

The computer's suggestion of 17.Bxe5 Rxe5 18.0-0-0 is a bit stronger.

17...Bxf4 18.Nxf5 Nf6 

Black no longer has the two Bishops, but he is still clearly better.

19.Rad1 Kf7 20.g3 Bd6 21.c4 Re2 

When Black's last piece is developed, it is definitely "Game Over" for me.

22.Rb1 Rhe8 23.Nd4 R2e4 24.Nb5 Rxc4 25.Nxa7 Rb4 White Resigns

One possible continuation shows how White has nothing in return for his sacrificed material: 26.a4 Rxa4 27.Nb5 Ra5 28.Nc3 Nxd5 29.Rfd1 Nf6 when Black is simply, if quietly, a piece up.

(Fortunately, the top 3 players of each group of 5 will advance to the next round of the "Italian Game" tournament, so even if I lose my final 2 games, there will still be a Round 3 for me.) 

AI, Revisited

 

About 2 1/2 years ago, in "Jerome Gambit: AI", I asked the artificial intelligence entity Chat GPT about the Jerome Gambit.

Shortly thereafter, in "Jerome Gambit: AI Once More", I inquired about the Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit.

As a further post, "Jerome Gambit: Has ChatGPT Learned Anything?" suggested, the answer was not much.

Still, in time I was struck by the AI's humor, as related in "ChatGPT Strikes Again!" featuring a made-up game where Bobby Fischer plays the Abrahams Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Bxf7+) and checkmates in 6 moves.

Today, I asked (the much improved) Chat GPT about the Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit, and it responded

The Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit is an eccentric counter to Black's Blackburne Shilling Gambit:

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4 4.Bxf7+!?

Black has just played 3...Nd4, hoping White grabs the apparent free pawn with 4.Nxe5?, when 4...Qg5 creates dangerous threats. Instead, White plays the Jerome-style bishop sacrifice 4.Bxf7+, forcing Black's king into the open. This is distinct from both the ordinary Blackburne Shilling Gambit and the regular Jerome Gambit.

What White is trying to do

After the usual continuation:

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+

White has sacrificed a bishop to:

remove Black's f7-pawn;

drag the king into the open;

recover the e5-pawn with check;

build an attack with c3, d4, Qh5+, Rf1, and rapid development.

One particularly wild line is:

5...Ke6 6.c3 Kxe5 7.cxd4+

White recovers Black's advanced knight, leaving an unusual position with an exposed king. Some versions can approach equality, but the tactics are highly move-dependent.

Is it any good?

Objectively, not really. After sensible defence, Black generally keeps an advantage, often holding a piece for two pawns. For example:

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Ke7 6.c3 Nc6 7.Nxc6+ dxc6

Black should consolidate with moves such as ...Kf7, exchange queens when possible, and avoid greedily marching the king through the centre.

At club level, however, it has practical value:

Setting                 Verdict

Classical tournament game Too risky for regular use

Rapid Playable as an                                                                                           occasional surprise

Blitz or bullet         Dangerous and                                                                                           entertaining

Against prepared opposition Usually favourable                                                                                    for Black

Its principal weapon is surprise, not theoretical soundness. White's moves are natural and forcing, while Black may have to find several unintuitive king retreats. The opening has also appeared only rarely, so its name and theory are less standardized than those of mainstream gambits. 

Here is an instructive online club game, 

HenriDepraz - sds_slothv2

2+1, Lichess, 2025:

1.e4            e5

2.Nf3         Nc6

3.Bc4         Nd4

4.Bxf7+     Kxf7

5.Nxe5+    Ke7

6.c3            Nc6

7.Nxc6+    dxc6

8.d4           Nf6?!

9.e5            Nd5

10.Bg5+     Nf6

11.exf6+     gxf6

12.Qe2+

Black emerged from the opening a piece for two pawns and was objectively better, but 8...Nf6?! allowed White to open more lines against the king. The game continued with Black missing chances to simplify:

12...            Kf7

13.Bh4       Be6

14.Nd2       Qd7

15.O-O       Be6

16.Nd2       Bf7

17.Qg4+     Kf8?

18.Bh6+     Ke8

19.Rfe1+    Be7

20.Ne4        Rg8

21.Nxf6#

The recorded score ends in checkmate. The instructive point is not that White's sacrifice was sound: Black obtained the better position but failed to neutralize the attack. On moves 14 and 17, exchanging queens or blocking with ...Bg6 would have made Black's extra material much more important. 

The practical rule is simple: play it for tactical fun and surprise value, but do not build a serious White repertoire around it.

Abrahams Jerome Gambit: A Quick Look

 

A quick look at the Abrahams Jerome Gambit, with the help of The Database and Stockfish 16.1, suggests that 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Bxf7+ Kxf7 4.Qh5+ should be answered by 4...Kf8, as it is the only move that gives Black a clear advantage.

The move 4...Kf8 appears in only 49% of the games (after 4.Qh5+) in The Database. Stockfish 16.1 (32 ply) evaluates Black as being almost 2 1/2 pawns better. 

Giving Black a small advantage (1/2 a pawn) is 4...Ke6, which appears in 13% of the 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Bxf7+ Kxf7 4.Qh5+ games.

Then follows 4...g6, which is seen in the second most games - 36% of them - but leads to a position that is evaluated as even.

Both 4...Ke7 and 4...Kf6, relatively rarely played, lead to advantage for White, each more 3 pawns.

What this means is that in the Abrahams Jerome Gambit, Black has a clearly best line of play in 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Bxf7+ Kxf7 4.Qh5+Kf8.

However, if The Database is reflective of the club play in the larger world, White can still play the Abrahams, knowing that the defender will choose the strongest 4th move less than half of the time.

(There is one game left to be completed before players can move on to the next round in the BISHOP'S OPENING CUP 2025 tournament. The good news for impatient people is that one side is a Queen ahead; the bad news is that the time control is 1 move in 10 days.) 

Tilt

 

I stumbled across Shawn Bennett's short piece on The House of Staunton website, "Chess Trolling: The Art of Playing Bad Chess Openings to Tilt Your Opponent" and had to smile.

The Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) and I and our fellow travelers had been found out!

Bennett explains

The form of trolling we will look at today takes place on the board. It is legal and often carried out in a more lighthearted spirit. Friendly high-level players [or not-so-high-level - Rick] may joke with each other by playing theoretically ridiculous openings...

Playing lesser-known openings is a good tactic in chess...

However, trolling your opponent requires going beyond coming up with an unexpected French Defense response. These chess openings may be unknown and completely crazy, or playable but highly dubious...

His cautions are spot on

The risks of playing a bad opening are pretty clear. If your opponent keeps their head, you’re just in a worse position. If you’re playing something untheoretical on purpose, you better have a good plan in place. In some cases, something suboptimal but trappy [like the Grob] can be very successful at the beginner and intermediate levels. 

Another lesson we learn from this kind of play is that the opening is not always as important as we think it is. Playing silly opening moves can lead to a losing position, but if your opponent fails to capitalize, the game may quickly even out. More than trolling your opponent, what a weird opening does is challenge them to calculate. Beyond memorization, do they understand opening theory enough to claim the initiative?

Personally, I think it's worth trying an occasional weird opening move. It makes for interesting games and creates a new challenge for players. 

 You can check out more of Bennett's wisdom. 

Jerome Gambit: Patiently Untangling Things

                                       

The Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) does not always lead to wide-open positions. 

In the following match, Bill Wall slowly puts his game together. He locks down his opponent's pieces, and then he opens a line for attack.

As the notes show (thank you for your help, Stockfish) a lot of complications loom in sidelines, but Bill is skilled at patiently untangling things.

Wall, Bill - Jay

SparkChess, 2026

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Kf8 

7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qg3 

Bill has reached this position in 36 games, scoring 74%. 

8...Qe7 9.Nc3 Nf6 10.d3 h6 

Black protects the g5 square, because the Knight at f6 is often a focus of White's pressure, and, now, a Bishop can not create a pin there.

However, the f-file is also critical, and White turns his attention there, to be able to play f2-f4.

11.O-O Be6 12.Na4 Bd4 13.c3 Bb6 14.Nxb6 axb6 15.f4 

15...Ke8 

Black immediately feels the heat, and moves to safeguard his King. 

The computer will suggest pawn-grabbing with 15...Rxa2 16.Rxa2 Bxa2 but that does not seem prudent to the defender.

16.Bd2 Rf8 

Counter-pressure.

17.a4 Kd7 

18.c4 

Locking down the d5 square.

18...Nh7 

Unblocking his Rook. Better might be 19...Rae8.

19.Bc3 g5 20.f5 Bg8 

21.Qh3 Rf6 

Black offers the exchange, to ease his defense.

Stockfish 17.1 suggests a slow success by the "Jerome pawns": 21...Nf6 22.Qxh6 Ng4 23.Qh3 Ne5 24.Qg3 c5 25.b4 Bf7 26.bxc5 bxc5 27.a5 Rfe8 28.Rab1 Kc8 29.h3 Nd7 30.Rb3 b6 31.f6 Qe6 32.axb6 Kb7 33.Qxg5 Ne5 34.Bxe5 Qxe5 35.Qxe5 dxe5

22.Bxf6 Qxf6 23.Rf2 

Bill is in no hurry. 

The computer suggests a grind: 23.b4 Bf7 24.Kh1 c5 25.bxc5 bxc5 26.e5 dxe5 27.Rfb1 Kc7 28.Rb5 Be8 29.Rxc5+ Bc6 30.Qg3 Qd6 31.Rxe5 Nf6 32.a5 Nd7 33.Re2 Qxg3 34.hxg3 Nc5 seeing White as a bit better. 

23...Bf7 24.Qe3 c5 25.Rd2 

Preparing a breakthrough.

25...Kc7 

Again, getting the King off of another hot file. 

The way to keep the game even was, first, a Queen exchange, i.e. 25...Qd4 26.Qxd4 cxd4 and then something like 27.Re2 Nf6 28.h3 Re8 29.a5 Kc6 30.a6 bxa6 31.Rxa6 Nd7 32.Ra7 Ne5 33.Rd2 Rb8 34.Rd1 Rb7 35.Rxb7 Kxb7 36.Kf1 b5 37.b3 h5 38.Ke2 h4 39.Ra1 Bh5+ 40.Kd2 bxc4 41.bxc4

26.d4 Bxc4 

A distraction, but 26...cxd4 only leads to a weak d-pawn and confusion in the ranks. 

27.dxc5 bxc5 28.Rad1 Re8 29.Rxd6 Qxd6 30.Rxd6 Kxd6 

Black has exchanged his Queen (and pawn) for two Rooks. The resulting position gives him Rook, Bishop and Knight against a Queen - but there is still the matter of White's two extra "Jerome pawns".

An active Queen gives White the advantage against three uncoordinated pieces.

31.b4 b6 32.Qd2+ Kc6 33.b5+ Kc7 34.Qc3 Bxb5 

Returning some of his "extra"material to stabilize the Queenside, where his King resides, but it turns out that he has more material at risk.

35.axb5 Rd8 36.Qg7+ Rd7 37.Qxh6 Black resigned

White's two passed pawns are more dangerous than Black's passed pawns. Now 37...c4 fails to 38.Qc6+ and 39.Qxc4; while 37...g4 falls to 38.Qc6+, and after 38.Qxb6, White has another passed pawn.

My Drawn Simultaneous Exhibition Game Against GM Sergey Smagin

 

                                                      

My Drawn Simultaneous Exhibition Game

Against GM Sergey Smagin

(by Yury V. Bukayev)

Dear readers, let me tell you about my drawn simultaneous exhibition game against GM Sergey B. Smagin which was played (August 16, 2026) during ‘The Chess Square 2026’ in Moscow. All official materials on this event can be shown by the editors of https://moscowchess.org . This game’s opening was Two Knights defence, its ending was almost Jerome-ish. And the score of this 15-board simultaneous exhibition was 14.5 – 0.5, like GM Valentina Gunina’s score in 2026 or GM Olga Girya’s score in 2025 (as you know).

GM Sergey B. Smagin – Yury V. Bukayev

15-board simultaneous exhibition, Moscow, 2026,

August 16 (‘The Chess Square 2026’)

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.0-0 Nxe4 6.Re1 d5 7.Bxd5 Qxd5 8.Nc3 Qa5 9.Nxe4 Be7 10.Bg5

I couldn’t take part in maestro Sergey Smagin’s previous simultaneous exhibition, although I prepared to it. During that preparation I found an interesting fact in some of his games: sometimes he doesn’t capture in time, sometimes he captures not in time. I solved to try to use this fact in my game against this strong Grandmaster to get an advantage, and I could get it, in spite of my large risk!

10…f6?!

This risky move was made to decline all known theoretical lines and to choose a line with a lot of possible captures. He started to think, and I understood that the situation on the board became unknown for him. Nevertheless, here he captured in time:

11.Nxf6+! gxf6 12.Bxf6 Rf8!? .

Again he captured in time:

13.Bxe7 Nxe7 .

But then he made a very ‘natural’ move and didn’t capture in time:

14.Re5?

The situation became unknown to me too. But I found the right way here:

14…Qb4! .

Again he captured in time:

15.Nxd4 .

In this complicated position I tried to choose among 15…Kf7 and 15…Rf7. I asked maestro Sergey Smagin to miss me and give me an opportunity to think more, but he renunciated. And I played:

15…Rf7!? 16.Nb5! .

The position was still complicated. Here I wanted to make a trivial defence 16…Qc4!, but my goal was to get a clear advantage, so I solved to make a very risky trap with my hope that here he will capture not in time. Thus, I played:

16…Kf8?! .

And this trap brought me a serious advantage after his response, because he didn’t see my main idea and captured not in time:

17.Nxc7? Bg4! .

The preliminary check 17.Qd8+! Kg7 18.Nxc7! was necessary. Probably, after 17.Nxc7 he waited for 17…Rb8, so he saw no obstacles for his further check. Further both opponents played well:

18.Qe1 Qxe1+ 19.Raxe1 Rc8 20.Nb5 Rxc2 21.f3 Bd7 22.Nd6 Rg7 23.R1e2 Rxe2 24.Rxe2 Bc6 25.Kf2 Rg6 26.Rd2 Rf6 .

This Jerome-ish endgame (we can see Black’s minor piece against White’s two pawns here etc.) was won for Black, and both opponents understood this fact. Also they understood that this win isn’t very easy to make. Maestro Sergey Smagin offered me…a draw here. That Sunday I knew that on Saturday he took part in heavy funereal events, and I have solved to stop the fight this moment to don’t make him a sport pain which could be dangerous for his health, it maybe. His funereal pain was also my pain (IM Eldar K. Mukhametov, R.I.P.), that is why you can see my black mourning tape on the photo that day.

Nevertheless, this my draw is almost a win.

Finally, let me show you some photos from this simultaneous exhibition.