Adjudication!?

The other day I was collecting some more Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) and Jerome-ish games from the FICS database when I ran across the following game that raised my eyebrows.


Anon - Anon
blitz, FICS, 2010

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Black wins by adjudication 0-1

By adjudication, huh? I've posted about this before, when it was a problem (see "A Sneaky Way to Defeat the Jerome Gambit") and when it was no longer a problem (see "Fool me once...").

I messaged both players, looking for an explanation.

The player of the Black pieces, the winner of the game, responded. He said that his internet connection had broken, but when he reconnected, his opponent did not accept many requests for continuing the game. It was then that he asked for adjudication and received the point. (After all, from a purely materialistic point of view, White is down a couple of pieces.)

So, it turned out that the player of the White pieces – actually, a member of the Jerome Gambit Gemeinde, with over 20 games in the updated New Year's Database – apparently had brought the loss upon his own head (I have not heard back from him yet).

Not a happy situation, but not as unjust as I had first feared.

graphic by Jeff Bucchino, the Wizard of Draws