Was H.Nakamura Right? Is JG ‘Unbreakable’, Is EG ‘Legendary’ For Beginners’ Games? (Part 4)

 

Was H.Nakamura Right? Is JG ‘Unbreakable’, Is EG ‘Legendary’  

For Beginners’ Games? (Part 4)   

  

(by Yury V. Bukayev) 

 

 

If an expert’s appraisal is based on something without real proofs, he can be right or “almost right” here sometimes. That is so, even in the case where he realizes that his appraisal is hasty, or non-serious, or bold, or emotional. Sometimes he is right here for a large per cent (for example, 55, 75 or 95) of cases which he appraises. 

 

We remember Rick Kennedy’s post ‘Jerome Gambit: Which Tier? Unbreakable?’ (September 23, 2020) where the notable dialogue about the standard system of the Jerome gambit (JG) between Top GM Hikaru Nakamura and IM Levy Rozman was shown as the part of their popular video and as its approximate text. Thus, they have discussed there what chess opening tier for beginners’ practice is right for it. The end of this text contains several phrases by Mr. Nakamura where he places the standard system of JG near the top of ‘Unbreakable’. Mr. Nakamura’s words contain no proofs of this very high appraisal. In my opinion, the tier’s name ‘Unbreakable’ is very arguable, because we discuss an opening practice, not an opening theory: each opening can be broken in a game as a result of practical mistakes of a player. But this name plays no role for us, just this very high appraisal of 4.Bxf7+ for beginners’ practice is important for our consideration.  

  

Before writing of my Part 1 of this analytical research (please, look at it: it’s a blog post of October 16, 2022) it was enough difficult for me to prove this Hikaru Nakamura’s appraisal, for a large per cent of cases. It was necessary to choose a certain control of time for beginners’ games, and I have chosen an unlimited one. And in the Part 1, Part 2, Part 3 of this research I have made some clear proofs of this Mr. Nakamura’s appraisal and some “not absolutely clear proofs” of it. We shouldn’t forget that the word ‘unbreakable’ includes a draw, not only a win.  

 

And here is my new invented trap - no.6 - which is based on a similar ‘natural’ reaction of a beginner. 

 

Trap 6. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 (Black defends his pieces, it is a typical response for an unlimited game.) 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.d4 Bxd4 9.Bg5 (It’s Mr. Tonetti’s idea.) 9…Ne7 10.Bxe7+ Qxe7 11.c3 AN (It’s the 1st part of my new trap.) 11…Bb6?! (It’s a typical reaction for beginners and not only for them. But Black has still a very large advantage.) 12.f4 Nd3+!? (It’s a typical reaction for everyone.) 13.Kd1 (It’s the 2nd part of this trap against beginners. They start to see 13…Nf2+ with the possibility of 14…Nxh1, and they start to celebrate their future win without thinking about plans of “the silly unknown opponent”.) 13…Nf2+ 14.Kc2!? (White’s position is absolutely terrible, but above psychology works.) 14…Nxh1?? 15.Qd5 checkmate. 

 

That is why White will get here also a very large per cent of identical successful results against beginners (especially children-beginners).  

 

It maybe, the invention of my Trap 1, my Trap 4, my Trap 5, my Trap 6 and my approaches (Part 1, Part 2) will cause Mr. Nakamura’s and Mr. Rozman’s wish to replace the standard system of JG into their top tier ‘Legendary’ (on ‘GMHikaru’ YouTube channel).