Was H.Nakamura Right? Is JG ‘Unbreakable’, Is EG ‘Legendary’ For Beginners’ Games? (Part 1)

 Was H.Nakamura Right? Is JG ‘Unbreakable’, Is EG ‘Legendary’  

For Beginners’ Games? (Part 1)   

  

(by Yury V. Bukayev) 

 

 

If an expert’s appraisal is based on something without real proofs, he can be right or “almost right” here sometimes. That is so, even in the case where he realizes that his appraisal is hasty, or non-serious, or bold, or emotional. Sometimes he is right here for a large per cent (for example, 55, 75 or 95) of cases which he appraises. 

 

We remember Rick Kennedy’s post ‘Jerome Gambit: Which Tier? Unbreakable?’ (September 23, 2020) where the notable dialogue about the standard system of the Jerome gambit between Top GM Hikaru Nakamura and IM Levy Rozman was shown as the part of their popular video and as its approximate text. Thus, they have discussed there what chess opening tier for beginners’ practice is right for it. The end of this text contains several phrases by Mr. Nakamura where he places the standard system of JG near the top of ‘Unbreakable’. Mr. Nakamura’s words contain no proofs of this very high appraisal. In my opinion, the tier’s name ‘Unbreakable’ is very arguable, because we discuss an opening practice, not an opening theory: each opening can be broken in a game as a result of practical mistakes of a player. But this name plays no role for us, just this very high appraisal of 4.Bxf7+ for beginners’ practice is important for our consideration.  

  

It was enough difficult for me to prove this Hikaru Nakamura’s appraisal, for a large per cent of cases. It was necessary to choose a certain control of time for beginners’ games, and I have chosen an unlimited one. I wasn’t sure that my success is guaranteed, but fortunately one month ago I have invented the following new trap for the standard system of JG:  

 

Trap 1. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 (Black defends his pieces, it is a typical response for an unlimited game) 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.d4 Bxd4 9.f4 AN Nc6 (Black defends his pieces with a large triumph) 10.b3 Bxa1?? (10…Ke7, and Black wins) 11.Ba3+ Nb4 12.Bxb4+ c5 13.Qxc5+ Ke6 14.Qf5 checkmate.  

 

Why is this trap a proof? Why is it, it maybe, unique for the standard system of JG? All Black’s moves before the alone mistake (10…Bxa1) are very strong, the most natural for a chess beginner and extremely probable to make for everyone. And psychology of this mistake is extremely typical for a beginner: he usually accepts a very large opponent’s sacrifice immediately, he thinks mistakenly that his opponents blunder almost always in such cases etc. Moreover, when a beginner is a child (it’s the most typical case), his happiness to accept a very large opponent’s sacrifice is so large that he stops to think here often. That is why a surprised beginner will make all these Black’s moves including the alone mistake (10…Bxa1), most probably. It seems now to be probably a unique situation for JG. White will get a very large per cent of identical wins against surprised beginners.  

 

For comparison, here are my other new traps which I have invented almost two months ago, let’s understand why it isn’t clear that they are also the proofs: 

 

Trap 2. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qh3+ Ke7 8.Qc3 Bxf2+ 9.Kxf2 Qf8+ 10.Ke1 Qf4 11.Qc5+ Kd8 12.d3 AN (Or 12.d4 AN with the same idea. Of course, these both moves are weak.) 12…Qxc1+ 13.Ke2 Qxh1?? (13…d6, and Black wins) 14.Qf8 checkmate. 

 

Trap 3. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Nc3 d6 8.b4 AN Bd4 9.Nd5 (This move is weak.) 9…Bxa1?? 10.Qf5 checkmate. 

 

We can see, it isn’t clear that in the Trap 2 and in the Trap 3 some of Black’s moves before his alone mistake are the most natural for a beginner. (Analogously, after 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.Nc3 it isn’t clear, is 8…Qf6! 9.d4 Qxf5 the most natural way for beginner. Probably, it is really the most natural way for him, because he feels usually that White’s Queen can become very dangerous here. That is why White can make nothing.) Thus, it isn’t clear that we have proofs here.    

 

It maybe, the invention of the Trap 1 and this new approach will cause Mr. Nakamura’s and Mr. Rozman’s wish to replace the standard system of JG into their top tier ‘Legendary’. In any case, I suggest to name this trap as the ‘First Golden Beginner’s Trap’.  

 

Further, we can start to look at the Evans gambit (EG), but at first I would like to suggest Mr. Nakamura (who has placed EG into the tier ‘Legendary’) to add at least one gambit into this top tier: it is any of Evans-Bukayev gambits (for example, the Morphy-Bukayev gambit, it was played first by the great maestro Paul Charles Morphy), where defender’s pawn h6/h3 prevents from his successful defence in a lot of cases where attacker’s winning Jerome-ish blow is possible. 

 

 

Contact the author:  istinayubukayev@yandex.ru  

 

© 2022 Yury V. Bukayev (Copyright © Bukayev Yury Vyacheslavovich 2022). All rights reserved.  

[A legal using of this investigation with a reference to it is permitted  

and doesn’t require author’s consent.]