Jerome Gambit: Can you see the problem with this move?

The following game shows the right way to play the Jerome Gambit.

The Queen sacrifice and resulting checkmate add to the enjoyment.

Wall, Bill - Atlaga

SparkChess, 2025

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.d4

Bill has reached this position in 606 of his games, scoring 95%. This compares quite favorably with all the games in The Database  - White scoring 55%. 

He has also played 6.Qh5+ in 397 games, scoring "only" 91%. Again, this is well above that of the games in The Database, with White scoring 57%. 

6...Bxd4 

When White sacrifices two pieces in the Jerome Gambit, he is "objectively" worse, as measured by Stockfish 17.1.

However, the attack that the sacrifices initiate, and the accompaning chaos on the board, give White chances to reverse that assessment. This often comes when the defender, unfamiliar with the Jerome, makes the 2nd (or 3rd, or 4th) best moves, stepping toward danger.

The text move is a good example. It is not a "bad" move, it simply is not the best, which would be 6...Qh4.

7.Qxd4 Nc6 

This move is similar. Compare it with a more standard line of play, e.g. 7...d6 8.Nc3 Nf6 9.Bg5 h6 10.Bh4 Ng6 11.Bg3. 

8.Qc4+ Kf8 

And, again. Black is still better, per the computer, but not by as much as a move or two ago. He had, instead, the standard 8...d5. 

9.O-O Ne5 10.Qc3 d6 11.f4 Nc6 

12.Nd2 Nge7 

Can you see the problem with this move? I do not think that Black did. (Me, neither) In developing his Knight where it would not be kicked by a possible White pawn advance to e5, he subtly undermines the defense of his King.

It is interesting to note that Stockfish 17.1 seems a bit stymied, as well. Its recommened line, 12...a5 13.b3 h5 is a bit of a head-scratcher.  

Bill can find a way through

13.b4 a6 14.Bb2 Rg8 15.Nf3 h6 

16.a4 Be6 

White gets to kick this Bishop, but the piece happily aids in the defense of its King.

17.f5 Bf7 18.b5 axb5 19.axb5 Rxa1 20.Rxa1 

Black has exchanged his one active Rook. White's remaining Rook, in contrast, threatens to advance to the 8th rank.

20...d5 

I do not know what to make of this move.

Is the defender giving back the sacrificed piece? Is he simply playing the often-critical pawn advance? 

Part of his problem is reflected in the computer's tortuous recommended line of play: 20...Ne5 21.Nxe5 dxe5 22.Qxe5 Bc4 23.Qc5 Be2 24.Qb4 Ke8 25.Qb3 Bh5 26.h3 Bf7 27.Qc3 Qd6 28.Kh1 Qd8 29.Ba3 Qd7 30.Bc5 Qd8 31.Qe5. My eyes glaze over.

The more positional computer line feels no better: 20...Nb8 21.Ra8 Ke8 22.Qd3 Bh5 23.Nd4 Bf7 24.c4 b6 25.h3 h5 

21.exd5 

I have to wonder if Bill intentionally side-stepped 21.bxc6 Nxc6 22.e5 for insidious reasons.

21...Nxd5 

You can argue that Black should have, instead, tried 21...Qxd5 22.bxc6 Nxf5 or 21...Bxd5 22.bxc6 Bxc6, but does it really matter?

It does, as Bill immediately shows.

22.bxc6 

Bill offers his Queen. The sacrifice must be accepted.

22...Nxc3 23.Ba3+ 

23...Ke8 

This allows checkmate, but the alternative is equally chilling: 23...Qd6 24.Bxd6+ cxd6 25.cxb7 Ke7 26.Ra8 Bd5 27.Rxg8 Bxb7 28.Rxg7+ Kf6 29.Rxb7 and in this endgame White has an extra Rook and a couple of pawns.

24.Re1+ Be6 

(24...Ne2+ 25.Rxe2+ Be6 26.Rxe6+ Qe7 27.Rxe7+ Kd8 28.cxb7 c5 29.Bxc5 h5 30.b8=Q#) 

25.Rxe6+ Kf7 26.Ne5 checkmate