Jerome Gambit: Ghosts in the Defense

Recently I received the following Jerome Gambit game. At first, I did not know what to make of it.

Anonymous - Anonymous
5 3 blitz, lichess.org, 2020

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

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qxh8 Nf6 9.Qxd8 White won

That was kind of strange... Except, a couple of days later, the same line played out in another game, a 3 0 blitz, although the defender struggled on for a dozen more moves before resigning.

How to explain Black's 8th move? A weak chess player? A hurried-by-the clock chess player? A scared-by-the-Jerome-Gambit chess player? An overconfident-and-therefore-inattentive chess player?

I finally decided that I had been onto something when I wrote "Half a defense is worse than none at all..." a decade ago.

My guess is that 7 out of 10 players who have ever heard of the Jerome Gambit had been exposed to Amateur - Blackburne, London, 1884: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qxh8 Qh4 9.O-O Nf6 10.c3 Ng4 11.h3 Bxf2+ 12.Kh1 Bf5 13.Qxa8 Qxh3+ 14.gxh3 Bxe4#

What if the defenders in both recent games remembered only a part of Blackburne's defense, or remembered it incompletely?

"Hmm... silly Jerome Gambit... accept the sacrificed Bishop... accept the sacrificed Knight... give back a Rook... trap the enemy Queen with my Kight - No, wait, I was supposed to play 8...Qh4 first!!"

I found an earlier game with even more pain.

KONB - elmflare
standard, FICS, 2011

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qxh8 Qh4 9.O-O Nf6

This time the Queen is trapped, but take note of White's next move. Meanwhile, Black repeats Blackburne's killer attack on the King, including sacrificing another Rook, and his Queen. 

10.Nc3 Ng4 11.h3 Bxf2+ 12.Kh1 Bf5 13.Qxa8 Qxh3+ 14.gxh3 Bxe4+ 15.Nxe4 Black resigned

White's Knight on c3 - instead of a pawn, as the Amateur played against Blackburne - ruined Black's fireworks display.

So, is 10.Nc3 White's way out of his Blackburne nightmare?

Actually, a game played at the end of May of this year said: No!

flash_ahaaa - thefinalzugzwang
2 1 blitz, lichess.org, 2020

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qxh8 Qh4 9.O-O Nf6 10.Nc3 

10...Bh3 11.Qxa8

Best might have been 11.Qxf6+ Kxf6 12.gxh3 Qxh3, with a Rook, a Knight and a pawn for his Queen, although Black would still be better.

11...Qg4 12.g3 Qf3 White resigned

Surprisingly enough, Grandmaster Larry Evans had discussed this line in his Chess Catechism (1970). He gave 10...Bh3 a "!". In discussion on this blog, "GM Larry Evans and the Jerome Gambit", Bill Wall pointed out 10...Ng4, that elmflare played, above.

(Is 10.Qd8!? the real solution to White's trapped Queen? That's a long story, and one that will have to wait for another day.)