Jerome Gambit: Wandering Away (Part 1)

My latest Jerome Gambit, played in the second round of the ongoing "Giuoco Piano Game" tournament at Chess.com, wandered away from recommended play and stumbled into a wilderness of weirdness.

I won, but I am not sure that I want to repeat the adventure.

perrypawnpusher - Ryszak

3 d/move, Giuoco Piano Game tournament, Chess.com, 2022

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 

5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qh3+ 

Varying from my usual 7.Qf5+ and occasional 7.f4.

The earliest game in The Database with this move is Idealist - Bhima, 3 0 blitz, FICS, 2000 (0-1, 20).

Although about 30 players have played 7.Qh3+ (with White scoring 28%), the most significant contribution to the move has come from recent analyses and a game by Yury V. Bukayev, published on this blog

"JG: The New in Its Opening Theory, in Its Psychology (Parts 1, 2, 3, 5 6, 7, 8, 9 & 10)" 

"Jerome Gambit: Analysis Leads the Way (Parts 1 & 2)"  

7...Ke7 

A major alternative is 7...Kd6  

8.Qc3 

This is Bukayev's idea - the Queen attacks both of Black's minor pieces. 

For history: 8.d4 d6 9.dxc5 Bxh3 10.cxd6+ Qxd6 11.gxh3 Nf3+ 12.Ke2 Nd4+ 13.Kf1 Nf6 14.Na3 Nxe4 15.Be3 Rad8 16.Rd1 Qa6+ 17.c4 Nf5 18.Bc5+ Nxc5 19.Re1+ Ne6 20.Rg1 Rhf8 White resigned, Idealist - Bhima, FICS, 2000. 

8...Bxf2+

This move disturbed me. Black finds a way to deal with the double attack, starting with this sacrifice.

As far as I know, this blog is the only place where this return of material has been discussed. Has my opponent been reading up on the line? Always a concern. 😓

9.Kxf2

If you have followed the links above, you know that Yury has recommended the side-step 9.Ke2!?

The question in front of me was, Theory or Practice? There was an earlier game with the capture. I followed it, instead.

9...Ng4+ 

Moving the second piece out from the White Queen's attack.

An alternative was seen in Yury_V_Bukayev - WaleraG, Chess.com, 2021: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qh3+ Kf7 8.Qh5+ Ke6 9.Qh3+ Ke7 10.Qc3 Bxf2+ 11.Kxf2 Qf8+ 12.Ke1 Qf4 13.Qc5+ Kd8 14.Nc3 d6 15.Qb5 Qg4 16.Rf1 Qh4+ 17.g3 Qe7 18.Nd5 c6 19.Qa5+ b6 20.Nxb6 Qc7 21.Rf8+ Ke7 22.Nd5+ cxd5 23.Qxc7+ Kxf8 24.Qxd6+ Black resigned

10.Ke2 

The King might be safer at g1 or e1.

At the time I was entranced by the idea that Black's King was blocking his Queen from travelling on the dark square diagonal to check on h4. So my King would be safer on e2, right? And the square was recommended right? This way, my King could capture a piece and then move on to where it should have gone? 

If this thinking seems a bit misty, please realize that it was just the beginning of the fog setting in.

10...N8f6 

Blocking White's Queen's access to g7.

11.h3 Nh6 12.g4 

At this point I probably should have apologized to my opponent. This is how you play the Jerome Gambit in a 3-minute game, not a game where the time control is 1 move every 3 days (although we usually move faster).

I still was focused on the clogged d8-h4 diagonal, with hopes for an eventual Qxg7+.

I take some solace in Stockfish 14.1's recommended line of play, which I discovered after the game: 12.e5 Nd5 13.Qf3 Qg8 14.d4 b5 15.Nc3 Bb7 16.Nxb5 a6 17.Bg5+ Ke8 18.Nxc7+ Nxc7 19.Qxb7 Qc4+ 20.Kd2 Qxd4+ 21.Kc1 Qc5 22.a4 Nf7 23.Bd2 Qc6 24.Qxc6 dxc6 25.Ba5 Ne6 26.Ra3 Very messy! White has 2 pawns for a piece, but the computer sees Black as a piece better.

[to be continued]