Jerome Gambit: Sarratt and Vitzthum Attack Videos

I just ran across a couple of short YouTube videos that cover two lines of play that resemble the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) and which might have been inspirations for Alonzo Wheeler Jerome (the lines of play, not the videos).

In the first, GJ_Chess (www.gjchess.com) presents "Chess Trap 46 (Sarratt Gambit)" which looks at 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 Bc5 5.Ng5 Nh6 6.Nxf7 the Sarratt Gambit (or attack).

In the second, Chess Traps (www.chesstraps.net) presents "Scotch Gambit - The Scotch Mist Trap (trap no. 393)" which looks at 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 Bc5 5.Ng5 Nh6 6.Qh5, sometimes called the Sarratt Gambit as well, but which might better be called the Vitzthum Attack.

These are short videos, but there is enough content to help you decide if you want to at the lines to your opening repertoire.

Jerome Gambit: A Little More Help

Here is another Bill Wall Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ ) miniature,

Wall, Bill - Dominico, Don

internet, 2021

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.d4 Bd6 

Black's Bishop goes to d6, as in Wall, Bill - Masterz, internet, 2021, but in response to the d-pawn instead of the f-pawn.

7.dxe5 Bxe5 

Better was the safer 7...Bb4+ 8.c3 Bf8. 

8.Qh5+ Ke6 9.Qf5+ Kd6 

This does not look comfortable for Black.

10.Nd2 b5 

To prevent White's Knight from going to c4 with a fork, but Bill finds a way to still make the move work - with a little help.

11.f4 Qf6 

Giving a piece back (he has an extra one) but there is more at risk, htere.

12.fxe5+ Qxe5 13.Nc4+ 

Here is the fork, which cannot be allowed to stand, but, still...

13...bxc4 14.Bf4 Black resigned

Jerome Gambit: A Little Help

I suspect that one of the reasons that Bill Wall plays the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) is that often his opponents provide a measure of "help" in their defenses that leads to quick wins. We can look at a few examples.

Wall, Bill - Masterz

internet, 2021

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 

7.f4 Bd6 

Black realizes that moving the Knight would allow the White Queen to move in, so he decides to return one of his two extra pieces for a pawn.

8.Qf5+ Ke7 9.fxe5 Bc5 

The Queen's "nudge" dissuades Black from capturing on e5.

10.d4 Bb6

The poor prelate! Is there no rest?

11.Bg5+ Black resigned

Black's King has to back up, surrendering his Queen.

Trying to give up only a piece leads to losing his Queen and more material - and ultimately checkmate. For example: 11...Nf6 12.exf6+ Kf7 13.fxg7+ Kxg7 14.Qe5+ Kg6 15.Bxd8 Rxd8 16.Rf1 Ba5+ 17.Kd1 Rf8 18.Rxf8 Bb4 19.Qf6+ Kh5 20.Rg8 d6 21.Qg5#

Jerome Gambit: "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short" (Part 3)

 

[continued from the previous post]

Well, it was clearly time for me to do something in the game. 

I decided to make some "scary" moves to see where it would get me. Although up to this point my opponent had not been playing like he was lower rated, I hoped I could unsettle him.

24.c3 a4 

Unfazed, my opponent plans to open the a-file, where his Rook resides.

25.d4 Bxd4 

And here is why: he gives back the piece. He can afford to.

The thing is, even if he had played, say, 24...Qf5 instead of 24...a4, then 25.d4 Kb7 26.dxc5 Nxc5 would have replaced one active piece with another. 

26.cxd4 Kb7 

Black realizes in time that 26...Qxd4 would be met by 27.Ba5+, winning the Queen.

However, the escape square should have been a6, not b7. I don't really understand the computer's reasoning, but it shows a long line where White avoids Black forcing a draw by repetition, only to sacrifice a Rook and force a draw by repetition himself.

Now White's Queen is able to get back into play. White is better.

27.Qc3 Rxe1 28.Qc6+ Ka7 29.Rxe1 

I had given a look at 29.Qxc7+ but was worried about having my Queen and King on the same file, with the enemy Rook about. It turns out, it would have been playable - and better than the text.

29...Qd8 30.Ba5 

Played because I thought I knew what my opponent's response would be.

30...Nb6 

The Knight has been sitting still for a dozen moves. Now is its time to act, to shield the pawn at c7 from the Bishop's attack.

In fact, the pawn should be defended by 30...Rc8, although White would still be better.

31.Re8 

Wrapping things up. If now 31...Qxe8, then 32.Qxc7+ Ka6 33.Qxb6 checkmate.

31...Qd7 

Or 31...Ka6 32.Rxd8 and White wins the Queen, and will subsequently checkmate.

32.Bxb6+ Ka6 33.Rxa8 checkmate

Well, I might be able to call the defensive line played "silly", but it must be acknowledged that my opponent played very serious chess. There is nothing about my success to discourage any opponent from playing the Sillycon Defense. 

Jerome Gambit: "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short" (Part 2)

 

[continued from previous post]

perrypawnpusher - jonmather

3d/move, "Giuoco Piano" tournament, Chess.com, 2021

It was worth looking at 11.Qc3 as an alternative. 

11...Qe7 12.Nc3 h6 13.Qh4 d6 

Black also had the sharp 13...d5, although after 14.e5 Ng4 White will be able to exchange Queens, lightening the pressure on the center pawns - and the King they protect.

It is strange, in a Jerome Gambit, to be talking about White's King, who has the option of castling, being in more danger than Black's King on c6.

Of course, with the text Black plans to stifle his opponent's thoughts about castling.

14.Bd2 Bg4 15.h3 

Reasonably planning to kick the offending Bishop away, in order to be able to castle Queenside.

After the game, Stockfish 14.1 recommended 15.Nd5 Nxd5 16.Qxg4, which takes care of the light square Bishop issue, but the continuation 16...g5 17.g3 Ne3 18.Bxe3 Bxe3 would leave White unable to castle, anyhow. This is emphasized by the computer's next move, 19.Ke2 which is followed by 19...gxf4 20. gxf4 Bb6 when Black has the usual piece for two pawns advantage, and White's King remains in danger.

15...Bh5 

This move maintains Black's advantage, although a post mortem suggestion of Stockfish 14.1 was for Black to pull the trigger with 15...Nxe4 when 16.Qxe7 Nxc3 17.hxg4 Rxe7+ 18.Kf1 Nd5 19.Re1 Rxe1+ 20. Kxe1 Be3 would have led to a greater advantage.

I think this is a case where it is necessary to remember that the game was played by two club players. Gerald Abrahams, in his The Chess Mind (1951), pointed out that the smallest part of a chess game is not a move, but an idea. jonmather and I have reached the stage of the game where the possibilities (as outlined by the computer) run far deeper than our shallow ideas.

16.g4 Bf7 17.O-O-O 

Whew. A small vistory. White has castled.

17...a5 

No rest for the weary.

18.g5 Nd7 19.Qg3 

The Queen no longer needs to aspire to being exchanged. It is time to get back into the game.

19...b5 20.g6 Bg8 

What to do, what to do, what to do?

After the game Stockfish 14.1 suggested that White's Queen go to f3 or g2, with veiled threats against the enemy King. Then White should consider bringing his Rook on h1 to e1 or f1, and then possibly playing his Knight to e2.

In response, Black's King should back away from the action, using the dark squares.

21.Nd5 Bxd5 22.exd5+ Kb6 23.Rhe1 Qf6 

The idea behind playing 20.g6 earlier was to keep Black's Queen off of f7 in this situation. My original plan was to now hit Black's Queen with 24.Bc3, but when I got to the move, I realized that 24...Bd4 was a complete answer.

It looked like Black's Bishop was in a position to be trapped, so I gave that some thought. Of course, my opponent could decide to simply give back his extra piece...

[to be continued]

Jerome Gambit: "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short" (Part 1)

  

Thomas Hobbes, in his Leviathan, (1651), wrote about life in the "natural state of mankind" before the establishment of a central government as being "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short".

A Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) game features an attack that often delivers that "natural state" to the defender.

It is important to remember, however, that in certain Jerome Gambit variations, effective (sometimes protective) central pawns are necessary for White, without which there can be dire consequences - as I learned quickly in my game four months ago, perrypawnpusher - Alfil_7, 3d/move, Piano Piano, Chess.com, 2021 (0-1, 13).

Of course, it was only a matter of time before I faced the same defense / counterattack again. It was not an easy matter.

perrypawnpusher - jonmather

3d/move, "Giuoco Piano" tournament, Chess.com, 2021

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 

7.Qf5+ Kd6 8. f4 Kc6 

I call this the "Sillycon Defense", as can partly be explained by earlier posts

Nine years ago, I presented Philidor1792 - NN, casual game, 2012 (0-1, 17), and commented

A new move, as far as I can tell. When you are two pieces up, as Black is, you can simply give one back, and remain with the advantage.

The anonymous NN was not soon alone: VMACforever - Sillycon, standard, FICS, 2013 [1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 Kc6 9.Qxe5 Nf6 10.d4 d6 11.d5+ Kb6 12.Qc3 a5 13.a3 Nxe4 14.Qb3+ Ka6 15.Be3 Qh4+ 16.g3 Nxg3 17.Qd3+ b5 18.a4 Re8 19.Qxb5+ Ka7 20.Qxe8 Ne4+ 21.Kd1 Bg4+ 22.Kc1 Bxe3+ 23.d2 White resigned] was played a year later. Since Black in that game was a 2369-rated computer program, it is tempting to label 8...Kc6 the "Sillycon defense".☺

Six years ago, when I posted "A Surprising New Defense Against the Jerome Gambit", I asked

Can Black's King simply walk away from his Knight like that??
The remainder of the game suggests that he can.

One year ago, when I presented the game Lc0 - Stockfish 11, 2020 (0-1, 43), I warned "Jerome Gambit: The Future Is Here".

Then came the crushing  perrypawnpusher - Alfil_7, 3d/move, Piano Piano, Chess.com, 2021.

I would like to point out that Black's King's abandonment of his Knight looks silly at first glance (White thinks "Well, then I will just take the piece"), but the move is part of a deeper "con" - to get someone to believe something by use of trickery - that includes danger down the e-file, which will often contain White's Queen and King.

9.Qxe5 Nf6 10.d3 

There are 18 games in The Database with the aggressive alternative, 10.d4. The main idea behind the move is that if 10...d6 then 11.d5+, pushing Black's King toward the Queenside where an attack on it might prove fatal. Results show this hope to be overly optimistic, however, as White scores 22% in the line. 

I chose the text move because I wanted as much support for my e-pawn as possible.

10...Re8 

Another piece targets White's center. The Database has only one other example, but it certainly looks like the right idea. Also effective is 10...d5.

11.Qg5 

The attacking idea behind this move was a bit misplaced - as was Black's King. There is nobody home on the Kingside to attack.

The defending idea behind this move was more motivated - to exchange Queens in the event that Black tries to break through the center with a piece sacrifice.

I need to rethink this variation. Some tentative new ideas follow.

[to be continued]

Jerome Gambit: Giuoco Piano Game Tournament Update

Giuoco Piano Game Tournament

Chess.com

Round 1

Group 13

perrypawnpusher 8 - 0

DocBrowne          6 - 2

ycarissan              4 - 4

jonmather             2 - 6

Ben_is_not10       0 - 8

perrypawnpusher and DocBrowne advance to the next round.