Jerome Gambit: Three Amigos

 

     Now  

If you are not familiar with the Stafford Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 Nc6 4.Nxc6 dxc6, I recommend that you stop right now and go read an earlier blog post on this site, "Jerome and Stafford Gambits: Spiritual Cousins".

I regularly hear from Dan Middlemiss, who sends Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) games my way. Rarely, I have some Stafford Gambit games for him that he hasn't already collected.

In any event a recent email added a third opening to the Jerome and Stafford Gambits as "spiritual cousins" - Chiodini's Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Bc5 3.Nxe5 Nc6, similar to the Stafford but with 2...Bc5 instead of 2...Nf6. The Three Amigos?

Writes Dan

Speaking of accidents, yesterday I was having playing the Lichess computer from my standard SG set position. I could not figure out why the computer was not making a move, so I goodgled my problem and one Lichess respondent said to set the position to “standard” game instead of “from a set position”. I did so, and encountered a weird semi-Stafford opening. After the game I went to the Analysis Board and discovered that I had played a variant of the King’s Pawn Game called the Chiodini Gambit. Not knowing what the heck that was, I am again resorted to Google. Lo and behold! I got a couple of responses directing me to your Jerome Gambit Blog and a few very interesting entries from way back in 2009 I think dealing with this fairly obscure line and its particular move order culminating in the classic Jerome-like bishop sacrifice on f7.

I was intrigued by all this and had a feeling that, if one took the knight with the d-pawn instead of the b-pawn, a familiar position resulted. So, I did some more fiddling of moves on the Lichess Analysis Board late last night and again early this morning.

Lo and another behold! I think I now have another answer to the age-old question: when is a Jerome Gambit not a Jerome Gambit? Answer: When it is a Stafford Gambit!!!!

I am attaching a few games to demonstrate this finding. In the larger attachment, I have some games in which White plays a fairly early Bc4 followed on move 7 or move 9 by the Jeromish Bxf7+. The second attachment is an analysis that Stockfish 14.1 did of a recent Rapid game between ak727272 (1960) and  monojeetdebnath (1954). White won the game which can be found in the larger attachment. But in the analysis of that game, I had SF 14.1 do a detailed breakdown of 1.Nf3 e5 2.e4 Bc5 3.Nxe5 Nc6 4.Nxc6 dxc6 5.Nc3 Nf6 6 Bc4 Ng4 7.Bxf7+. The results indicate clear winning lines for Black as you will see.

Anyway, I hope you find this interesting and in line with your recent columns discussing different near-Jerome move orders. Furthermore, it is the closest I can find to a clear intersection between the Jerome Gambit and the Stafford Gambit. Finally, it perhaps starts a conversation about the importance of move order for White in the Jerome Gambit.

An eventful little sidebar to my Stafford Gambit game collecting!

ak727272 - monojeetdebnath,10 0 rapid, lichess.org, 2021: 1.Nf3 e5 2.e4 Bc5 3.Nxe5 Nc6 4.Nxc6 dxc6 5.Nc3 Nf6 6.Bc4 Ng4 7.O-O Qh4 8.h3 Nxf2 9.Bxf7+ Kd8 10.Qh5 Nxh3+?! = (10...Nxe4+! -+) 11.Kh2 Bd6+ 12.e5 Bxe5+? +- 13.Qxe5 Ng5+ 14.Kg1 Rf8 15.d3 Nxf7 16.Rxf7 Rxf7 17.Bg5+ Black resigned

This is definitely a topic that I will pursue further.