Jerome Gambit: Old Friends

It has been about a year and a half since I took a look at a line of play that short-circuits the Jerome Gambit 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Na5!?. - and even then "Jerome Gambit: First Steps (Part 2)" just touched on it.

Sometimes it is hard to stay in touch with old friends.

Sure, three years ago, "Revision" showcased a Stockfish vs Stockfish game with the variation. And five years ago there was "Chess is Difficult: All You Have To Do Is Win". True, six years ago there was "End It" and "Bots on Our Side (Part 1)"

But the real story was only told seven years ago - "Opening Discussion, Not Quite Closed".

If you want some ideas on how to deal with this "Jerome Gambit, Avoided", you might want to check out the links. 

Jerome Gambit: Teamwork

angelcamina has shown many times that when it comes to bullet chess, the rapid time control and the wild Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) make excellent team mates.

Some examples follow.

angelcamina - pepoandra

1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2022

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 

7.Qd5+ Kf8 8.Qxc5+ Qe7 9.Qe3  Nf6 

angelcamina has also faced 9...d6 10.O-O Nf6 11.d3 Kf7 12.Nc3 Rf8 13.f4 Kg8 14.b3 c6 15.Ba3 d5 16.Bxe7 Nxe7 17.e5 Ng4 18.Qg3 Nh6 19.d4 Nef5 20.Qd3 g6 21.h3 a6 22.g4 Ne7 23.Rae1 Be6 24.Na4 Kh8 25.Nc5 Bc8 26.f5 gxf5 27.gxf5 Bxf5 28.Rxf5 Nexf5 29.e6 Rg8+ 30.Kh2 Rg3 31.Qe2 Rag8 32.Qe5+ R3g7 33.Rg1 White won on time, angelcamina - albatronus, 1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2020. 

10.Nc3 d6 

Or 10...d5 11.f3 dxe4 12.dxe4 Ng4 13.Qf3+ Ke8 14.O-O N6e5 15.Qf4 Rf8 16.Qg3 h5 17.f3 h4 18.Qe1 Nxh2 19.Kxh2 h3 20.f4 hxg2 21.Kxg2 Ng4 22.Qg3 Rh8 23.Rh1 Rxh1 24.Kxh1 Bd7 25.f5 Nf6 26.Bg5 Kf7 27.Bxf6 Qxf6 28.Qg6+ Qxg6 29.fxg6+ Kxg6 30.Rg1+ Kf7 31.Rf1+ Ke7 32.Nd5+ White won on time, angelcamina - mustapha1996, 1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2019;

Or 10...Kf7 11.O-O Rf8 12.f4 Kg8 13.d4 d5 14.e5 Nd7 15.b3 Nb6 16.a4 Bf5 17.a5 Nd7 18.Nxd5 Qf7 19.c4 Be6 20.Nxc7 Rac8 21.Ba3 Rfd8 22.Nxe6 Qxe6 23.f5 Qc6 24.fxg6 hxg6 25.d5 Qc7 26.e6 Nc5 27.Bxc5 Qxc5 28.Qxc5 Rxc5 29.e7 Re8 30.d6 Rc6 31.Rad1 Rc5 32.d7 Rf5 33.Rxf5 Kh7 34.dxe8=Q gxf5 35.Qh5+ Kg8 36.e8=Q checkmate, angelcamina - jasper2700, 1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2021. 

11.O-O Ng4 

It is always tempting to attack the enemy Queen, especially in bullet play, even when it is not the strongest move.

Also seen: 

11...Bg4 12.f3 Bd7 13.d4 Kf7 14.f4 Rhe8 15.e5 dxe5 16.fxe5 Kg8 17.exf6 Qxe3+ 18.Bxe3 Rxe3 19.fxg7 Kxg7 20.Nd5 Re2 21.Nf6 Bc6 22.d5 Bb5 23.Rac1 Ne5 24.b3 c6 25.c4 Ba6 26.dxc6 Nxc6 27.Nh5+ Kg6 28.Nf4+ Kg7 29.Nxe2 Nd4 30.Nxd4 Rd8 31.Ne6+ Black resigned, angelcamina - PUIG-98, 1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2019; 

11...Kf7 12.d4 c6 13.f4 Rf8 14.e5 dxe5 15.fxe5 Kg8 16.exf6 Qxe3+ 17.Bxe3 Rxf6 18.Rxf6 gxf6 19.Rf1 Kg7 20.Ne4 f5 21.Nd6 Bd7 22.Nxf5+ Bxf5 23.Rxf5 Re8 24.Kf2 Nh4 25.Rg5+ Kh6 26.Rg8+ Kh5 27.Rxe8 Nf5 28.Re5 Kg6 29.Rxf5 Kxf5 30.Kf3 h5 31.h3 a6 32.g4+ hxg4+ 33.hxg4+ Kg6 34.Kf4 b5 35.Ke5 a5 36.Kd6 a4 37.Kxc6 a3 38.bxa3 Kf6 39.Kxb5 Black resigned, angelcamina - guanume, 1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2021; 

11...Ke8 12.d4 Kd8 13.f4 Re8 14.e5 dxe5 15.dxe5 Ng4 16.Qg3 Qc5+ 17.Kh1 h5 18.h3 h4 19.Qf3 Nh6 20.f5 Nxf5 21.Qd3+ Bd7 22.Rxf5 c6 23.Rf7 Re7 24.Bg5 Nxe5 25.Bxe7+ Qxe7 26.Rxe7 Nxd3 27.Rxd7+ Kxd7 28.cxd3 Kc7 29.Rf1 Rd8 30.Rf7+ Kb6 31.Na4+ Kb5 32.b3 White won on time, angelcamina - traan, 1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2020; and

11...Bd7 12.f4 Bc6 13.d3 Kf7 14.b3 Rhf8 15.Ba3 Kg8 16.Rae1 Rfe8 17.Qg3 a6 18.e5 Nh5 19.Qg4 Nhxf4 20.exd6 Qxe1 21.Rxe1 Rxe1+ 22.Kf2 Ree8 23.dxc7 Rac8 24.Bd6 Bd5 25.Bxf4 Nxf4 26.Nxd5 Nxd5 27.Qc4 Kh8 28.Qxd5 Rxc7 29.h3 Rxc2+ 30.Kg3 Rxa2 31.b4 Ra3 32.b5 White won on time, angelcamina -  iskander2001, 1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2021. 

12.Qg3 N6e5 

13.f4 Nc4 

The routine 13...Nc6 would keep the game in balance.

The Knights become active, but do not improve Black's game. 

14.f5 h5 15.h3 Nge5 16.d4 Nf7 17.b3 Nb6 

18.Ba3 Bd7 19.e5 Qg5 20.Qd3 Ke8 

The purpose of this move is unclear. Zeitnot?

21.e6 Bxe6 22.fxe6 Nd8 23.d5 Ke7 24.Rae1 c6 

Hoping to undermine the enemy pawn center, but checkmate is approaching.

25.dxc6 Nxc6 26.Qxd6+ Ke8 27.Rf7 Rd8 28.Rf8+ Rxf8 29.Qxf8 checkmate

Jerome Gambit: Anti-Dynamic

The opening line in the computer vs computer Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) game, Stockfish 15 - Komodo 13, 2022 (0-1, 79) mentioned in an earlier post sets out on an interesting and atypical individual path.

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 

In its evaluations, Stockfish 15 lists 6...Ng6 as the 4th best move, although it is, of course, a popular and reasonable choice.

One difficulty with the line is that it returns the effective Bishop (which often delays White's intended f2-f4 after castling) on c5, while protecting the Knight that was on e5.

Was 6...Ng6 part of Komodo's opening "book"?

The Database has 5,390 games with this position; White scores 56%. 

7.Qd5+ Ke8 8.Qxc5 Nf6 9.f3 

Stockfish's choice is anti-dynamic, surrendering the idea of f2-f4 in a preparation for further reinforcement of its e-pawn. 

Does the computer "expect" 9...d5 ?

9...d5 

The only other game in The Database that has the position in the above diagram is Wall, B - Sumit, 2021: 9...Rf8 10.O-O Qe7?! 11.Qxc7 Kf7 12.Nc3 Kg8 13.d4 Qd8? 14.Qxd8 Rxd8 15.e5 Ne8?? 16.Bg5 Black resigned.

10.d3

This triangle pawn formation d3/e4/f3 (in different positions) can be seen in almost 1,100 games in The Database. The play involved is generally different from the wild attacks that often characterize the Jerome Gambit.

The computer vs computer game now develops into attacks on Kings on opposite wings

More than 60 moves later, Black won. 

The result of a human vs human game might well have been different.

 

Jerome Gambit: Dealing With the Annoying

The opening line in the computer vs computer Jerome Gambit game, Stockfish 15 - Lela, 2022 (0-1, 69) mentioned in the previous post has an interesting history.

The line 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 d6 can appropriately be seen as the "silicon" or "annoying" defense.

The earliest game example with this position in The Database is D'Aumiller, A. - A.P., Livorno, 1878 (1-0, 19). Alonzo Wheeler Jerome played two uncompleted correspondence games against S.A. Charles in 1881, and defeated J.K. Zimmerman in a correspondence game the same year.

However, I started referring to the line as the "silicon" defense because computer chess engines have an affinity for it, including Alaric, Alfil, Bison, Comet, Critter, Demon, GriffyJr/Sr, Hiarcs, Junior, Knight Stalker, La Dame Blanche, Lc0, Talking LCD, Fritz, Rybka, Shredder, Spike and Zarkov. I am sure there are others.

It is also known as the "annoying" defense - because it is. (I recall MrJoker's concerns expressed in "Jerome Gambit: Time For A Sobering Cup of Coffee" a few years ago.)

The Database has 370 games with the defense, with White scoring 46%.

It dawned on me that, from the point of view of The Database, Stockfish 15 - Lela, 2022 featured the highest rated individual (human or computer) playing the Jerome Gambit against the highest rated defender. What was there to learn from such an encounter?

The continuation 8.fxe5 dxe5 seems clear, followed by 9.Qh3+ Ke7 10.Qg3 Kf7 11.Qxe5 - White has two pawns for his sacrificed piece, and nervous players might have already veered off and settled for a draw by repetition.

The further, 11...Qh4+ 12.g3 Qe7 13.Qh5+ g6 14.Qe2, looks like the kind of position that computers like to grind; in the game, 69 moves.

I have only one human vs human game with this position, and it is neither exciting nor encouraging - Wall,B - Guest3551214, playchess.com, 2013.

Certainly, I have to do more work here.

Is it helpful to consider going back to the original games for ideas? D'Aumiller tried 8.d4!?, instead of capturing the Knight. Jerome tried 8.Qh3!?+ and 8.f5+!? in his games with Charles, and 8.f5+!? in his game with Zimmerman.

Or, is it necessary to postpone f2-f4 until after 7.Qf5+ Kd6, according to traditional thinking?

Also, what about Yury V. Bukayev's modern 7.Qh3+ Ke7 8.Qc3 Bd6 9.f4 ? (For a lot to think about, review "JG: The New in Its Opening Theory, in Its Psychology [Parts 1, 2, 3, 5 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 & 11]"  and"Jerome Gambit: Analysis Leads the Way [Parts 1 & 2]" )

Jerome Gambit: Silicon Opinions

Years ago I wrote reviews for the online chess site Chessville.com. That was something that I put a lot of work into and really enjoyed. 

Even though it has ceased publication, you can still visit Chessville, via The Wayback Machine - there is a lot of very interesting, helpful and entertaining content there.

(Plus a lot of my reviews and short stories.)

One book that I reviewed was The Final Theory of Chess (Philidor Press, 2008) by Gary M. Danelishen, which the author, himself, described

The Final Theory of Chess is an attempt to lay a solid foundation upon which further analysis may be built in order to reach the first goal of a partial solution to the game of chess.  Between mid 2004 and 2008, daily computer analysis was conducted and The Final Theory of Chess slowly was written.  During this time, a network of six computers running the Fritz family of computer chess programs continuously calculated around the clock.  Each previous round of analysis laid a foundation upon which future analysis was conducted…

Of course, nowadays no top Grandmaster would go into battle without at least a glance - more likely, a deep dive - into what computer analysis has to say about the opening that is going to be played. Computer chess programs can be used to provide guidance and make suggestions.

All of which brings me to two recent YouTube.com videos which present computer vs computer games which explore a couple of different lines in the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+).

renz4ever has a series of video titles such as "Stockfish Goes for Bongcloud Against Leela!",  "Stockfish VS Komodo - Fried Fox Pork Chop Opening", "Komodo VS Stockfish - Grob Gambit",

"Stockfish VS Komodo - Danish Gambit", and "Stockfish VS Komodo - Triple Muzio Gambit" - but what really interested me was a pair of Jerome Gambit games played by two engines with extremely high ratings

"Stockfish Shows Leela His Jerome", a computer rated 3880 vs one rated 3860 

and  

"Stockfish vs Komodo - Jerome Gambit" a computer rated 3880 vs one rated 3475

In the first game, Black adopted the "silicon defense" and prevailed in 69 moves. I don't suppose that is the "final theory" on the Jerome Gambit - after all, if it took a computer rated 3860 almost 70 moves to defeat the Jerome...

In the second game, we saw that giving "Jerome Gambit odds" could be risky, even when playing an opponent rated about 400 points lower - at least in the silicon world. Computers can be harsh: I once figured that about 200 points would be enough for a human playing the Jerome Gambit to preavail against a human opponent. 

(By the way, I would love to look up the lines of play in renz4ever's videos and see if they appear in Danelishen's book, but the latter only looks at 1.d4.) 

Jerome Gambit: Misdirection

The following Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) is an interesting example of a magician's "misdirection", where attention is drawn to a particular space while the real action occurs elsewhere. 

In this case, the defender attends to the exchange of pieces - lastly, Rooks - and overlooks some critical central action.

Wall, Bill - KFKF

internet, 2022

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Kf8 

Alonzo Wheeler Jerome presented this move in his analysis in the Dubuque Chess Journal of July 1874, and played it successfully in two correspondence games against Daniel Jaeger in 1880.

7.Qxe5 Qe7 8.Qf4+ Nf6 9.Nc3 d6 10.d3 Qe5 11.Qxe5 dxe5 

The Queens are gone, but Bill has other attacking ideas.

12.Rf1 Ke7 13.f4 Bd4 

This is an interesting idea, but there was nothing wrong with 13...exf4 14.Bxf4 c6.

14.Ne2 Bg4 15.c3 Bxe2 16.Kxe2 Bb6 

Black continues to simplify the position, although in doing so the value of White's "extra" pawns becomes more apparent.

Stockfish 15 (30 ply) sees the position as equal, although I suspect most club players would prefer playing with the pawns.

17.fxe5 Nd7 18.d4 Rhf8 

Seeking another piece exchange. He might have considered hitting at the pawn center, instead, with 18...c5.

19.Rf5 g6 20.Bg5+ Ke6 

A slip. He could have continued his exchange policy with 20...Ke8 21.Rf3 Rxf3 22.gxf3 but White's pawn mass would gain in power.

21.d5 checkmate

Grandmaster Hambleton in Nathan Phillips Square

 

Sitting at one of outdoor chess tables in Nathan Phillips Square in Toronto, Grandmaster Aman Hambleton unleashes the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) in a 5 minute game.

The YouTube.com video "I TROLLED My Opponent Using THIS Opening" presents the enjoyable game - made even more valuable by the Grandmaster's voice-over narration of the play, including what was going through his mind and what he was analyzing.

It is clear that the fresh air agrees with Grandmaster Hambleton. See other examples of his (non-Jerome Gambit) play: 

"Chess Hustler Wanted To Bet An INSANE Amount", 

"I Wasn't Expecting Him To Be So STRONG!"

"He Flew 1,500 Kilometers To Play Chess Against Me!"

"MY IMMORTAL DOUBLE SACRIFICE!"