Jerome Gambit for Dummies 2.0 (Part 1)

 

Five and a half years ago, in the post "More About The Jerome Gambit" I reminded readers of this blog

Visit the library or bookstore and you will find many helpful introductory books in the "...For Dummies" series. They are very popular. 

So - why not a "Jerome Gambit for Dummies" book? 

That was my inspiration for a series of posts - "Jerome Gambit for Dummies" 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. 

These posts included a series of "Critical Positions" that develop as the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4Bc5 4.Bxf7+) is played. They are good instruction for those new to the Jerome, and review for more experienced players.

There is also some research worth reviewing.

"More About The Jerome Gambit" continued

Later I offered "The Return of Jerome Gambit for Dummies" 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8.

This series of posts "builds" the Jerome Gambit from the shortest game in The Database (you may be surprised how short), move-by-move, to the opening you are familiar with.  

Since the original Jerome Gambit for Dummies series began in 2009, and the second series began in 2012, I thought it was time to upgrade. Hence "2.0". I will include newer information, drawn from The Database, guided by the insights of Stockfish 14.1 and Komodo 12.1.1, and directed by my own developing experience - have I learned anything over the intervening decade? - and that of other Jerome Gambiteers.

[to be continued]

Blackmar - Jerome Gambit Revealed

 

I have been puzzled by Karel Traxler's reference to the "Blackmar - Jerome Gambit" (see " 'Tis A Puzzlement..." and "The Blackmar - Jerome Gambit?!").

Yury V. Bukayev's suggestion is very interesting. Here it is. 

Here is my version about Mr. Traxler's name 'Blackmar-Jerome gambit'.

Mr. Traxler's publication with this strange name was published in the October 11, 1892. My version is based on that he has read Mr. Gossip's text of 'The Chess Player's Vade Mecum' (1891):

> " We have therefore eliminated obsolete openings and confined
> ourselves merely to a brief examination of a dozen of the leading
> debuts...; omitting those openings in which the defense is declared by
> the most competent theorists to be weak or inferior, as for example
> Philidor's and Petroff's Defenses to the Kings Knight's opening; the
> Sicilian; the Greco Counter Gambit; Center Counter Gambit;
> Fianchettoes, Blackwar and Jerome Gambit, etc. ".

Please, look attentively at the part of this text:
" Philidor's and Petroff's Defenses to the Kings Knight's opening; the
Sicilian; the Greco Counter Gambit; Center Counter Gambit;
Fianchettoes, Blackwar and Jerome Gambit, etc. ".

> I think, Mr. Traxler asked himself: "Is there Blackwar Gambit in chess?" And he answered himself: "I don't know it. I know Jerome Gambit, I don't know Blackwar Gambit. It maybe, Mr. Gossip has written about Blackmar Gambit here, but I'm not sure". Then he said to himself: "The variant of an interpretation of this text "Blackwar & Jerome Gambit" ( = "Blackwar-Jerome Gambit") is very possible too! It maybe, Mr. Gossip knows much more than I about who is the first creator/player of 4.Bxf7+ in Giuoco Piano, so it maybe he has said here that Alonzo Jerome wasn't the first one! Thus, here is my main question: are here in this text two gambits - Blackwar (or Blackmar?!) Gambit and Jerome Gambit - or this one (BJG) only? I should analyse the language structure of Mr. Gossip's sentence to find a right answer". And Mr. Traxler started to do it. He said to himself: "Mr. Gossip has written:
> "Blackwar and Jerome Gambit"
> (not "Blackwar and Jerome Gambits"), although he has written in the same sentence:
> "Philidor's and Petroff's Defenses" ,
> so it is extremely notable!" Then Mr. Traxler said to himself: "Moreover, Mr. Gossip has written:
> "the Greco Counter Gambit; Center Counter Gambit;"
> (not "the Greco and Center Counter Gambits"), so it is notable that he hasn't grouped names of two these (counter) gambits in this sentence as "... and ... Gambits": probably, each counter gambit and each gambit isn't grouped as "... and ... Gambits" in this sentence". Then Mr. Traxler said to himself: "In result, I think that Mr. Gossip has written about one gambit, not about two ones, probably". Finally, Mr. Traxler asked himself in 1892: "Will it be good to publish " Blackwar ", if it is " Blackmar ", in fact? It will not be good for the newspaper and for me!"

That is why he has published the name "Blackmar-Jerome", I think.

Jerome Gambit: The Hurrieder I Go, The Behinder I Get

It takes skill - and quick reflexes - to be successful in a 1-minute bullet game. The following contest shows the defender coming up with an interesting move that should have caused his opponent to use up precious seconds of thinking time. Perhaps it did, but Black also produced a couple of moves that undid much of his own hard work.

The Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) can be like that. Doubly so in bullet.  

chessjuan1972 - relja01

1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2022

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 Nd3+

As I pointed out in "Brilliant, but Not Sound"

Ahhh... The joys of being two pieces ahead! There are so many ways for Black to return material.

Jerome Gambiteers should pay attention, as this admittedly unpopular move, nonetheless, leaves Black better.

8.cxd3 Qf6  

Black quickly puts his Queen on a square where she often is effective against the Jerome. Unfortunately, this leaves the Bishop hanging. A move that opened up lines and interrupted the attack on the piece was 8...d5.

9.Qd5+ Ke7 10.Qxc5+ d6

White is up a couple of pawns, but that is not usually the deciding factor in such a quick game.

11.Qe3 

Computers that think faster than a speeding bullet suggest that 11.Qxc7+ was playable and even better than the text move - but, seriously, this is a human vs human game.

11...Bd7 12.O-O Nh6 

13.Nc3 Ng4 14.Qg3 Rhf8 

The last slip.

15.Nd5+ Black resigned

Ouch.

 

Jerome Gambit: For A Moment Not So Annoying

In the following game, White faces a Jerome Gambit defense that can cause its share of headaches. However,  a couple of minor slips by Black suddenly change the game into a miniature. 

Fegatello25 - Thedarkripper

5 0 blitz, lichess.org, 2022

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 d6 

As I mentioned in "Jerome Gambit Secrets #6"

I have called this the "annoying defense" (because it is) or the "silicon defense" (because of the affinity computer chess programs have for it). It was first seen in D'Aumiller - A.P., 1878 and figured in six of Alonzo Wheeler Jerome's games against S.A. Charles in their unfinished 1881 correspondence match.

Years ago, in "An International Master Refutes the Jerome Gambit".International Master Gary Lane, in his The Greatest Ever Chess Tricks and Traps (Everyman Chess, 2008) says

I think this is the best way to defend: allowing one of the extra pieces to be taken, and in return obtaining a solid position with extra material.

The fact that Black's King can hang around in the center in apparent safety - is annoying.

8.fxe5 dxe5 9.Qh3+ Kd6 10.Qd3+ Ke7 11.Qg3 

White's Queen and Black's King engage in a seemingly meaningless dance that reinforces the notion that the defender's monarch is completely safe.

With only one pawn in exchange for his sacrificed piece, White arrives at the above position with the opportunity to grab either the e-pawn or the g-pawn.

According to The Database, there are 60 previous games that reached this point, with 26 wins, 23 loses, and 11 draws for White - a decent 53%. Stockfish 14.1 (31 ply), however, sees Black as more than a Rook better. 

I would love to add encouragement from my personal experience, but the one time I arrived at this position was a prelude to disaster - see "Jerome Gambit: Back to the Drawing Board".

11...Bd6  

Black protects his e-pawn. Remarkably, the computer suggests that instead of this novelty he should ignore both en prise pawns and play 11...Ke8 with advantage.

12.Qxg7+ Ke6 

Well-played for a blitz game. True, Black's King might be safer after 12...Ke8, but his Rook at h8 would not be.

13.O-O 

Taking advantage of the fact that Black's repositioned Bishop allows castling, White adds his Rook to the attack on the King.

13...Ne7 

The proper place for the Knight is on f6, and although the game remains complex, White is probably a bit better. An odd line explored by Stockfish 14.1 and Komodo 12.1.1 is 13...Nf6 14.d4 exd4 15.Bg5 Be5 16.Rf5 Rg8 17.Rxe5+ Kxe5 18.Bxf6+ Ke6 19.Qxh7 Kxf6 and both computers say the game will be drawn by repetition of position

analysis diagram

Instead, White now has a forced checkmate.

14.Qg4+ Nf5 15.Qxf5+ Ke7 16.Qf7 checkmate

Jerome Gambit: Still Relatively Obscure

On page 48 of Ten Ways to Succeed in the Opening (2001), by Timothy Peter Talbut Onions and David Regis, you will see a diagram familiar to many of those who play the Jerome Gambit.

The authors write

Here, White has attacked straight from the opening, and has won a Rook and two Pawns for a Bishop. 

But look at the pieces left! Black's pieces can all come into the attack quickly, while White's are sitting around the edge. 

Black is winning here: try it!

It is clear that the authors were impressed by the finish to the Jerome Gambit game Amateur - Blackburne, London, 1884 - the collection Mr. Blackburne's Games at Chess (1899) dated the game at "about 1880" but contemporary accounts give 1884 - which continued from the diagram: 8...Qh4 9.O-O Nf6 10.c3 Ng4 11.h3 Bxf2+ 12.Kh1 Bf5 13.Qxa8 Qxh3+ 14.gxh3 Bxe4 checkmate

Amateur - Blackburne, London, 1884

It is worth pointing out, however, that, contrary to Onions' and Regis' assessment, Black is not winning in the first diagram. Instead, White has two lines of play that lead to better positions after 8...Qh4, Black's strongest move.

9.O-O Nf6 10.Qd8 Bb6 11.e5 dxe5 12.Qd3; and

9.d4 Nf6* 10.Nd2 Bxd4 11.0-0 Ng4 12.Nf3 Qxf2+ 13.Rxf2 Bxh8 14.Rf1 

To be fair, the Jerome Gambit is still a relatively obscure opening, and was even moreso, 20 years ago. Quite likely the Blackburne game was the only one the authors were familiar with.  

(* There is a wild and wonderful alternative, here, producing scary chess for White, but which is objectively even worse for Black than the main line: 9...Bb4+ 10.c3 Bh3 11.gxh4 Qxe4+ 12.Kd2 Qh4 realizing that taking the Rook allows White's Queen to escape and harass his King with Qxh7+ 13.cxb4 Re8 14.Kc2 Ne7 15.Qxe8+ Kxe8 16.Nc3 Qxf2+ 17.Bd2 Qf5+ 18.Kb3 and White has 2 Rooks and a Bishop for his Queen)

The Jerome Gambit Is For The Birds

Recently I noticed a tweet (via Twitter) from ParamountDealz ("Manufacturer and supplier of the world's finest chess products: Chess Sets, Chess boards, Tournament chess combos, Chess Clocks, Chess bags, Scorebooks") about the "extremely aggressive opening JEROME GAMBIT" which very clearly describes the topic of this blog

The Jerome Gambit is an extremely aggressive opening that usually derives from the Guioco Piano. White sacrifices both his king side bishop and knight in exchange for an exposed king and the possibility of an aggressive attack. Moves usually start with: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 White usually continues with Qh5+ . This gets the most important piece into the attack early and leaves black with the most possibilities to blunder.

That about sums it up, doesn't it?

(For some reason Google Translate felt the need to translate the tweet from Bulgarian to English, although ParamountDealz is a company based in India. Go figure.)

 

What is "The Database"?

Readers of this Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) have no doubt noticed that I regularly refer to "The Database.

What is "The Database"?

Currently it is a chess games database (using ChessBase) that contains over 75 thousand games and analyses It is currently in ChessBase format, but I can easily produce a pgn database from it.

There are games with the moves 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+, the main line Jerome Gambit.

There are games with the moves 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+, the Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit.

There are games with the moves 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.0-0 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ and 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+, both variants of the Semi-Italian Jerome Gambit.

There are games with the moves 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.0-0 Bc5 6.Bxf7+, the Semi-Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit.

There are games with the moves 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+, the "Open Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit", or Noa Gambit.

There are 6,388 games with the moves 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4 4.Bxf7+, The Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit.

There are games with the declination 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Na5 4.Bxf7+.

There are games with the moves 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Bxf7+, the Abrahams Jerome Gambit.

That leaves miscellaneous games that are Jerome-related, primarily through an early Bxf7+. 

Besides being a large selection of games to consult or play over, The Database has a reference function. With over 20 years of games from FICS (plus lesser numbers from other sites like lichess.org) - believe me, that took a lot of work in the beginning, downloading games & using the "filter" function & visually inspecting the results - I have a pretty good representative sample (not just wins, but losses and draws as well) of how online club players play the kind of openings this blog covers. 

Players can consult their favorite computer (over the years I have used Crafty, Fritz, Houdini, Komodo, Rybka and Stockfish) to get an "objective" assessment of play, and then they can dip into The Database and see how well the lines have fared in relevant play.

Often the computers look at a line and say "beware", while actual results suggest "dive right in".

For comparison, here are 2 historical "snapshots" of the development of The Database: "My Jerome Gambit Database" and Evolution of "The Database".

If you are interested in a copy of The Database, send me a request via email.