Jerome Gambit: Entering the Maze (Part 1)

The following Jerome Gambit game was quite a challenge, pushing me beyond my experience and preparation, and forcing me to work out tactics in positions that I did not fully understand.

When I sought understanding from Stockfish 11 in "blunder check" mode, after the game, I got a lot of criticism and alternative lines of play that were quite incomprehensible. Bleh.

(By the way, Stockfish didn't actually criticize me, it just provided annotations. Somewhere in my desk, however, I do have a copy of an earlier version of the chess engine Fritz - a "talking Fritz" that has a whole CD of comments and insults to go with its analysis. You call that a chess move?? I think I  played a couple of games against it and put it away - but perhaps I should give it another chance...) 

 

perrypawnpusher - DaniyarManat

"Piano Piano" tournament, Chess.com, 2020

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 

7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 Qh4+ 

Cue the violin music.

9.g3 Nf3+ 

As I wrote in an earlier post

An interesting line that I refer to as the "Nibs' Defense," which made its first appearance in the American Chess Magazine of June 1899 in a comical article lampooning a new pastime, chess by phone.  

In a constructed game the author, "R.F.," overcame continued line noises and interruptions to use the Jerome Gambit to defeat "Nibs" in a dozen moves -- erroneously claiming checkmate, by the way. 

And, in "Jerome Gambit: Don't Confuse Yourself"

Both players need to know what they are doing to come out okay.

About 13 years ago, I received a letter - one of those old fashioned things written on paper, and mailed with a stamp - from my chess friend "Mad Dog". He was playing a Jerome Gambit game (online) and was excited that he had just won his opponent's Queen. He was expecting to wrap up the win after dealing with a few complications.

His opponent won. It turns out that the Queen had not been "lost", it had been sacrificed. It was a deep sacrifice that, back then, required some serious thinking time by a computer chess program to work out. (I think it required a search depth of 20 ply. I know, today Stockfish 11 does that in an eye blink.) I was always suspicious, but "Mad Dog" was okay with the outcome. Good game and all that.

Anyhow, the current game was the 20th time that I had faced this line, and although I had scored 16 - 3 up until this game, I was always worried that my opponent would find his way through the complications.

10.Kf1 

The first big decision: does the King go to d1 or f1? For another discussion, see "Jerome Gambit: Very Complicated and Dangerous"

10...Ne7

This is the move I had worried about, but had not yet faced. It appears to be effective against both 10.Kd1 and 10.Kf1. The Database shows 10 earlier games, where White scored 4 - 5 - 1 (45%). Again, that may more reflect the experience and pluck of the Jerome Gambit players, rather than the "strength" of the line for the attacker.

Some time ago, my chess friend Philidor1792 played some games against a chess computer program, testing the strength of 11...Ne7. I posted about them in "Sailing Off of the Edge of the World" and "Sailing Off Again", with a focus on 10.Kd1. 

Most relevant to my game was "Sometimes", where Philidor1792 played 10.Kf1 and met 10...Ne7 with 11.e5+ Kc6 12.Qe4+ d5 13.exd6+ Nd5 14.gxh4, although after 14...Bh3+ "White's King can find no peace."

More recently, my chess friend Boris had played the 11.e5+ line successfully against 10...Ne7, but he pointed out that 13.exd6+ seemed to have unnerved his opponent. (Boris also had played 10.Kd1; instead of 14...Bh3+, 14...Bg4 would have been effective.) 

My question in the game, therefore, was "Do I play 11.e5+, etc and hope that DaniyarManat doesn't know the line - or do I play the move that I had been holding in reserve for a dozen years?"

[to be continued]