The Jerome Gambit: Jerome Gambit: No Longer Missing (Again)

As long as I am presenting games that I have somehow missed posting on this blog, let me present the following affair - from the same tournament as the previous game, as it turns out.

perrypawnpusher - BunnyWarrior

Giuoco Piano Thematic tournament, Chess.com, 2016

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

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6

7.Qd5+

A "nudge" to move the King to the back rank, to interfere with the development of his Rook.

7...Ke8 8.Qxc5 d6 9.Qe3 Nf6

I have reached this position in 62 games, scoring 76%.

The computers assess this as over-performing.

10.O-O

If Black could now castle, which seems natural at first glance (if you have not been following the game), Stockfish 15.1 would assess his position as about a Rook better. But - Black cannot castle. He has to settle for the typical Jerome Gambit advantage of a piece for two pawns.

10...Kf7 11.f4 Re8

Does Black even need to castle, now?

This position appeared as early as Vazquez,A - Carrington,W, Mexico, 2nd match (1), 1876 (1-0, 34).

12.f5 Ne5 13.d4 Neg4

Kick the Queen!

Stronger was to retreat the Knight to d7.

14.Qb3+ Kf8 15.h3

Kick the Knight!

15...Nh6

The above-mentioned Vazquez - Carrington game saw the interesting alternative 15...Rxe4, giving back a piece, i.e. 16.hxg4. Actually, Stockfish 15.1 prefers that White offer a pawn, instead, with 16.Nc3 Rxd4 17.hxg4 Rxg4 and assesses that position as minimally favoring Black.

Sometimes I do not understand computers; frequently they do not understand the Jerome Gambit.

16.Bxh6 gxh6 17.Nd2