Jerome Gambit: Familiar?

 

As I was playing over the moves in a pretty cool Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) game highlighted in the YouTube video "Mating Attack!How to destroy it in The Brutal Jerome Gambit ! Crush your opponent and win The game!" by chessmastervijay it somehow felt familiar to me. 

That seemed kind of silly. After all, there are over 3,900 posts on this blog, and over 81,000 games in The Database. Familiar?

The names of the players were not given in the video, so that did not provide any clue.

I could have emailed chessmastervijay and asked, but I didn't want to bother him unless it was completely necessary.

After some digging I turned up the computer vs computer game Stockfish - Cramlingbot (1-0, 19), presented in the post "Jerome Gambit: Quick Checkmate", a couple of months ago. (No wonder it seemed familiar.)

Like I said, pretty cool game.

Jerome Gambit: What Is This Garbage?

Here is a link to a Jerome Gambit video by International Master Eric Rosen titled "Jerome Gambit Gone Wrong (kind of)". 

About a year and a half ago ("Jerome Gambit: Recent Videos") I posted the link, but without the title of the video, just the url.

By the way, "Jerome Gambit: What Is This Garbage?" is also the name of a light-hearted post from little over a year ago.

And if you search this blog for other examples of the word "garbage" you are likely to run into the post "Jerome Gambit: First There Is The Confusion Factor" which has this sage reflection

I am reading IM Sam Collins' Gambit Busters (Everyman Chess, 2010) with a know-your-enemy focus, and enjoyed the following, from the chapter "Escaping the Defensive Mindset"

It is well known that club players, typically, go to pieces when confronted by a gambit. Of course, for every player there are some gambit lines which they know, and perhaps their theoretical knowledge will suffice to get them to a safe position. But this won't be the case when they are confronted by an established gambit they don't know, an unusual or forgotten gambit, or where their opponent deviates from theory.  

To my mind, gambits are the situations where there is the single biggest gap between passively looking at a position at home, and facing something over the board. Skimming over an opening variation with a cup of tea, maybe Rybka muttering in the background, it all looks so straightforward - an "=" symbol (or something even more favourable), a bunch of crisp responses demonstrating the intellectual failure of our opponent's adventure. 

But at the board, things are rather different. First, there is the confusion factor...

Jerome Gambit: Technical vs Tactical Win

 

Recently I received a note and a Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) game.

Hello Rick,

I'm not a very good chess player (rating around 750) but I stumbled on the Jerome Gambit, and your website. I tried playing it in this game and managed to get my opponent to resign

I think that my correspondent was a bit modest in his assessment of his play. What do you think?

gatherercryptic - farapoker

10 0 blitz, Chess.com, 2023

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

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Kf8 

7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qf4+ Nf6 9.O-O d5 

Black has the right idea: if now 10.exd5 then 10...Qxd5 would be good for him. 

However, as White shows, this is the first of a couple of oversights by the defender.

10.e5

The pawn advances, taking advantage of the pin on the Knight.

10...Bd6 

A delightful mistake. Black worries about the enemy pawn capturing his Knight, so he pins it.

11.exd6 

This kind of thing happens in blitz chess.

11...Qxd6 12.Qxd6+ cxd6 

White now faces a different kind of challenge.

He was ready for the wild sacrificial attacking play that often comes with the Jerome Gambit, but now he is faced with "only" an extra pawn, a safer King, and enemy doubled isolated pawns which might become targets.

13.d4 Bf5 14.Nc3 

Focusing on development. The c2 pawn is no big deal.

14...Bxc2 15.Bf4 Rd8 16.Rfe1 Kf7 17.Rac1 Be4 

18.f3 Bf5 19.Nb5 Rhe8 

A slip. Instead, the uncomfortable 19...Ne8, protecting the d-pawn but blocking the Rook at h8, was necessary, even though it allows 20.Nxa7.

Possibly Black was expecting now 20.Rxe8 Nxe8 when his defense

would be a bit easier.

20.Nxd6+ Rxd6 21.Bxd6 Rxe1+ 22.Rxe1 Black resigned

White is the exchange and a pawn ahead. The win will be a "technical" one rather than a "tactical" one, but Black seems assured that he will find it.

Jerome Gambit: Watch Out

An active Queen. A castled King. The enemy Queen at f6, her Knight on e5.

We have seen this before. Watch out.

pablosko - DrDibalsparo

5 0 blitz, lichess.org, 2021

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.d4 Bxd4 7.Qxd4 d6 

8.Bf4 Qf6 

What is the threat? Watch out.

9.g3 Nf3+ White resigned

Jerome Gambit: It's the Little Things

In the following game it is fun to watch Bill's Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ ) advance bit-by-bit, as he takes advantage of the little things that add up to a win.

Wall, Bill - Orion

internet, 2022

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 

The Database has 5,504 games with this position. White scores 56%.

For comparison sake, Stockfish 15 at 30 ply assesses the best responses for Black to be, in order of strength 6...Ke6, 6...Kf8, 6...g6, and then 6...Ng6. All lead to advantage for Black.

One reason for 6...Ng6 lagging behind in the rankings is that it allows White to capture Black's Bishop at c5 - a piece that can cause trouble, starting with a pin on White's f-pawn.

7.Qd5+ Kf8 8. Qxc5+ N8e7 

9.O-O d6 10.Qe3 

Bill has also tried 10.Qc4. See Wall,B - Guesty1960624, PlayChess.com, 2013 (1-0, 30). 

10...Be6 

Black pursues development. The difficulty with this move is that it encourages White to play a move he already wants to play and plans on playing - but one which forces Black to reconsider the placement of this Bishop (because of a possible pawn fork).

11.f4 Bf7 12. d4 Qd7 

Black looks ready to answer an f-pawn advance by giving a Knight back. He might have tried returning a pawn, instead, with 12...c5 13.dxc5 dxc5 14.Qxc5 Rc8 15.Qf2 Kg8 and White's advantage would be small.  

13.f5 Nh4 

A Knight on the rim is dim. 

14.Nc3 h6 15.h3 b6 16.Qf2 g5 

17.g3 Nhxf5 18.exf5 Bc4 19.Ne2 

19...Kg7 

Okay, this is no longer a little thing. It is a big thing.

A better continuation: 19...Re8 20.b3 Bxe2 21.Qxe2 Rh7 22.Bd2 Ng8 23.Qf3 Rhe7 24.Rfe1 Rxe1+ 25.Rxe1 Nf6 26.g4 Rxe1+ 27.Bxe1 Qe8 and White's advantage has been kept in check.

20.f6+ Kh7 21.fxe7 

Reasonable follow through.

Stockfish 15 surprised me with the suggestion 21.b3, with things playing out  21...Bd5 22.c4 when Black has too much material hanging.

21...Qxe7 22.Re1 Rhf8 

23.Nc3 Qd7 24.Qg2 Rae8 25.Bd2 b5 26.Rxe8 Rxe8 27.b3 Bf7

White has the extra piece.

 28.Rf1 Bg6 29.Nd5 Be4 

Overlooking the fact that the Knight fork will come with check.

30.Nf6+

 Forking King, Queen, Rook and Bishop!

30...Kg7 31.Nxe4 Black resigned

The New Opening Theory Of ‘3-Check Chess’ & JG (Part 1)

                                   The New Opening Theory Of ‘3-Check Chess’ & JG (Part 1)   

  

(by Yury V. Bukayev) 

 

 

Dear reader, you know already a lot of very important facts about theory of the standard system of the Jerome gambit (JG) in chess, but, it maybe, you take an interest in similar board games too. This my analytical research is about the board game ‘Three Checks chess’ ( = ‘3-Check chess’ = ‘Three-Check chess’ ) mainly, although you can find something new in theory and psychology of the Jerome gambit in ordinary chess in the note. 

   

The article ‘What is 3-Check chess?’ ( https://support.chess.com/article/351-3-check) informs us about rules of this popular board game: “Normal [chess – Yu. B.] rules apply, but you can also win (or lose!) a game by checking (or getting checked) 3 times in total”. The portal Chess.com places this board game near Fischer Random chess in its list ‘Chess Variants’, above other “chess variants”, and it is right.    

 

Here is my brief analysis of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ with my theoretical inventions for this difficult board game. 

 

(Three Checks chess) 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5? 4.Bxf7+! AN [It’s a very strong move.] 4…Kf8! [4…Kxf7?? 5.Nxe5+!, and White wins immediately, because his next move will be his third check.] 5.Bxg8!? [There are some else good ways here, for example 5.0-0!?.]  

 

{Let me make here also a note for JG in ordinary chess. Thus, in ordinary chess, according to my following new idea, this new Jerome gambit way (5.0-0) is a notable psychological (or handicap) continuation of White’s style (4.Bxf7+), because 5…Kxf7! here leads to White’s much more strong attacks, than after 4…Kxf7!. Thus, for example, 5.0-0 Kxf7 6.Nxe5 Nxe5!? 7.Qh5+! g6?? 8.Qxe5 wins, 7.d4! is also strong for White, because, first of all, the response …Qh4 doesn’t play that main winning role in theory. You remember that my analysis from the post ‘Anatoly Karpov & Jerome Gambit (Part 5)’.}  

 

5…Kxg8 [The most aggressive alternative is 5…Bxf2+. After 6.Kxf2!? (6.Kf1!?) 6…Qe7! (with the idea 6…Qc5+! and a winning Queen’s check further) 7.d4 exd4 8.Nbd2!? White has the advantage.] 6.Qe2! [This move has a threat 7.Qc4+ with a final Queen’s check further (1:0). After 6.c3!? d5 Black has a more strong counter-play.] 6…d5 7.exd5 Qxd5  

 

Here White should choose among the following good ways. 

 

I)8.Nc3  

 

A)8…Qf7 9.Ne4! Bb6 [9…Nd4 10.Nxd4! Bxd4 11.Nf6+! gxf6 12.Qg4+, 1:0] 10.Nfg5 Nd4 [10…Qd5 11.Qh5! with the idea 12.Nf6+!, but not 11.Nf6+ gxf6 12.Qh5 Bxf2+! 13.Kd1 Bg4+ or 13…Qxd2+, 0:1] 11.Nxf7 with a winning advantage 

 

B)8…Bxf2+ 9.Kf1!? [9.Qxf2!? with the idea 10.0-0 is normal too, but 9.Kxf2?? Qc5+!, and Black wins by his third Queen’s check on the next move] 9…Qc5 10.Ne4 with a winning advantage [With the threats 11.Nxc5, 11.Nf6+, 11.Nxf2 etc. If 10.Qxf2?? then 10…Qc4+!, 0:1]    

 

II)8.0-0 with the same plan, with an advantage 

 

We can see the first analytical steps here. 

 

 

Contact the author:  istinayubukayev@yandex.ru  

 

© 2023 Yury V. Bukayev (Copyright © Bukayev Yury Vyacheslavovich 2023). All rights reserved.  

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

and doesn’t require author’s consent.]