Jerome Gambit: My Opponent Knows What He Is Doing (Part 2)

[continued from previous post]

perrypawnpusher - warwar

"Italian Battleground", Chess.com, 2019

10.O-O Re8 11.d3 Kg8 12.Na4

My dad used the expression "fat, dumb, and happy" to describe someone who was content and clueless. All of that is reflected in my 12th move.

Black has castled-by-hand, he is at least even in development, and he still has his annoying dark squared Bishop. What would be more reasonable for White than to swap his Knight for that Bishop? After all, in many "quiet" Jerome Gambit games, Bill Wall has gone after the "minor exchange", hasn't he?

As the game unfolds, it will be clear that I should have tried the thematic move 12.Bg5.

By the way, the after-game computer analysis from Chess.com passed by this move without comment. It is interesting to note that the computer analysis at lichess.org, looking at the game Chess-for-All - Sveti14, blitz, lichess, 2017 (0-1, 30), had criticized its 12.h3?! as an "inaccuracy", and recommended 12.Na4. (I wish I could blame my move choice on this - but, no.)

12...Bd4

As I mentioned in the previous post, this current game and my Round 3 game against Abhishek29 had started out with the same 8 moves. Curiously, though, I had also tried the Knight-for-Bishop swap in that game, after my opponent had similarly advanced his Bishop to d4 before retreating it to b6: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Kf8 7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qg3 Nf6 9.Nc3 Be6 10.O-O Kf7 11.d3 Rf8 12.Na4 Bd4 (a novelty, according to The Database) 13.c3 Bb6 14.Nxb6 axb6, etc. 


13.c3 Be5

I had expected, as a matter of course, 13...Bb6 14.Nxb6 axb6, again being happy that my opponent had wasted a move advancing his Bishop. I was now even happier that my opponent had trapped his own Bishop.

14.f4 Nh5

An unpleasant surprise - possibly prepared beforehand.

15.Qf3 Nxf4 16.Bxf4 Rf8 

I was not expecting this, either. Clearly, things were getting out of hand. (There was also nothing wrong with the simple 16...Bxf4.)

After some consideration, I decided my best chance was to give up any thought of "attack" and enter an endgame where Black would be objectively better, but, at club level, where my extra pawns would give White chances against the extra piece. 

17.Bg5 Rxf3 18.Bxd8 Rxf1+ 

Sensible and consistent, but he might have tried 18... Rxd3.

19.Rxf1 b5 20.Bxc7 bxa4 

It turns out that Black's dark square Bishop was safe, after all. My Knight was the piece in danger.

21.d4 Bf6 22.Bxd6 Ba6 23.Re1 Re8 

Black's Bishops are scary, but White's pawns should be able to cause some trouble, as well. Things unfold in an orderly manner.

After the game, Stockfish 10 still gave Black an edge, although it preferred 23...Bc4 to the text.

24.b3 Kf7

Moving the King toward the center of action. There was nothing wrong with throwing in 24...axb3 25.axb3, and then choosing 25...Bd3 instead.

25.e5 Bg5 26.c4 Bd2 27.Rf1+ Kg6 28.d5 Be3+ 29.Kh1 Bd4 30.e6 Bf6 

What gives the advantage, the piece or the pawns?

I started to breathe easier when I realized that Black's light square Bishop was blocked in by my pawns, balancing things out. Drawish? I hoped so.

After the game, Stockfish 10 suggested that by this point I had actually gained the advantage. I'm still a bit skeptical. There is no question, however, that in club play, the chances of the pawns have to be better.

[to be continued]