Digging for Gold

I'm always looking for Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) and Jerome Gambit-related games.

Since I play much of my chess at FICS, I often go to their online database to search for games. My request for games identified as "C50" in the ECO system usually returns 200 games (the maximum in a search) from the day in question.

I can use my ChessBase8 to filter games that are likely to interest me, doing a position search (Kings and Queens on their home squares, the White Bishop on f7). I can do another search on players who used the Jerome in that previous search, to see if I've found an unknown member of the Jerome Gambit Gemeinde. 

I recently found over 170 Jerome Gambit games from one player, a pleasant discovery.

Recently Marcel Van Kervinck used his computer to pull 100 million games off of the FICS site. I haven't yet figured out how to handle a PGN file that size (supposedly my ChessBase program can handle files of "only" 40 million games), though.

At about the same time I discovered that Joshua Shriver had collected over 4 million FICS games, which were later refined and put on Josh's website. I happily searched those files for Jerome Gambit gold...

Right now, I'm wondering if there are other online chess-playing sites that would have large numbers of games that I could search as well.  

Readers are welcome to send in suggestions. (Of course, if you want to send in the games, that would be okay, too.)

Repairing a Variation (Part 4)

Once you have defined the problem (Part 1) with an opening variation, reviewed some game history (Part 2), and seen what has been written about the line (Part 3), it is time to analyze and test out new ideas.

In the case of the "Nibs" defense of the Jerome Gambit, (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) there are three strategies to choose from.


#1) Embrace the chaos

You may choose to continue to play the main line, anyway, believing that it is so complicated that your opponent will never find a way through to the advantage. (So far, only one player, peonconorejas has.) In this case, it is important to be familiar with the places (especially moves 10 through 17) where Black might slip up, so that your greater understanding of the strategic and tactical nuances gives you the better chances.

An example is perrypawnpusher - electrahan, blitz FICS, 2009.

Black did not discover the killer 10...Ne7 (and the idea behind it) and instead retreated his Queen with 10...Qh6.

Three moves later I reached the following position.

My comment at this point of the game was

My one advantage against electrahan was that I was more familiar with the positions and play, and so was significantly ahead on the clock.

The game continued to be very interesting, and I prevailed in 35 moves.

#2) Find a Jerome Gambit endgame that you are comfortable with.

Much to my annoyance, despite a lot of hard work (with the help of Rybka 3, Fritz 8 and ChessBase 8) I have not yet found a "bust" to Black's Queen sacrifice in the "His Nibs" defense.

Players who are comfortable with a Jerome Gambit endgame (blackburne and mrjoker come quickly to mind) – with one, two or three pawns for the sacrificed piece; ideally, also with an active King – can look at the following line.

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 Qh4+ 9.g3 Nf3+ 10.Kf1

If you are going to battle the Queen-sac line, I think 10.Kd1 is the right move. If you are looking toward the endgame, 10.Kf1 is to be preferred.

10...Ne7 The same strong move with the same strong threats. 11.Qxc5+ This move will either displease or please your opponent, depending on whether the second player knows the Queen-sac line or not. 11...Kxc5 12.gxh4

This is an interesting position. White has two pawns for a piece, although the one at h4 is threatened. As long as a lot of pieces remain on the board, Black's King is at risk; but with each exchange, he becomes more of an attacker than a defender. Black's advanced Knight may or may not be in danger, similar to the game perrypawnpusher - Temmo, Chessworld, 2008.

It's not very exciting for White after 12...Nxh4 13.Nc3 (with d2-d3 and possibly Rh1-g1 to follow) but if Black's Knight becomes dim on the rim, or if White's King can mosey over that way, there may be some play to be had.

#3) Change to another line of play.

In this case, it might be worth investigating 7.f4, instead of the 7.Qf5+ and 8.f4 line, something that I am doing right now.

(But I still hope to be able to crack the Queen-sac some day!)

graphic by Jeff Bucchino, The Wizard of Draws

Critical Line: 5...Kf8 (3)

In "Stats (1)" – where I began to take a look with ChessBase's "Opening Report" at the games in my Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) database – I mentioned that a
Critical Line for White came after 4...Kxf7 when he scored only 29% with 5.Nxe5+ Kf8 6.Nxc6 dxc6. In "Critical Line: 5...Kf8 (1)" and "(2)" this variation has been explored further.

I've faced 5...Kf8 three times, and twice my opponent recaptured with the other pawn, 6...bxc6:
perrypawnpusher - hdig, blitz 7 4, FICS, 2007 and perrypawnpusher - mika76, GameKnot.com, 2008 .

By the way, there's the odd game tonik - mika76, GameKnot.com, 2008, where Black recaptured with neither pawn, but instead started his own counter-attack: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Kf8 6.Nxc6 Bxf2+ 7.Kxf2 dxc6 8.Rf1 Qd4+ White resigned. Giving up the game was premature, as after 9.Ke1+ the first player had time to protect his e-pawn with 10.d3, and maintain a small advantage.

Still, in the diagram above, while it is possible to see Black's typical advantage in the Jerome Gambit (piece for two pawns), it is smaller than usual; and it is hard to see why White can't go about his standard plan of castling, developing pieces, and advancing his Kingside pawns with the usual play. My one game with the line, perrypawnpusher - Ykcir, blitz 14 0, FICS, 2009, ended in a quick draw, and things did not appear nearly as dire as to attract the label "Critical Variation."

Stats (Huh?)

Readers might come away from examining the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) database statistics – see "Stats (1)", "Stats (2)" and "Stats (3)" – with a small sense of confusion, as the Opening Reports seem to both show that White scores "better than average" in a number of lines; yet there are Critical Lines where White scores poorly.

(Readers might also want to compare the analysis with the "A Closer Look" series, which took a look at the Ninja Knights T3 Jerome Gambit thematic tournament: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ; as well as look at the Comments following "Jerome Gambit: Transylvanian Terror!")

This result reflects both the nature of sampling bias (that is, because of how the games were collected – that Jerome Gambit wins are more likely to be published and available to the researcher than Jerome Gambit losses – there are more opening successes than failures, despite the opening's "objective" strength); and the nature of the opening itself (defenders are often taken by surprise, become intimidated, and do not take advantage of the winning opportunities that are presented to them).

A comparable case would be a database that collected all available games in which Queen-odds were given. Although being a Queen up is usually considered enough of an advantage for all but the rankest of amateurs to win with (see Geoff Chandler's "Blunder Table"), it is highly likely that the results of the database would highly favor the odds-giver.

Stats (3)

Taking yet a further look (see "Stats (1)" for a preliminary peek and "Stats (2)" for a deeper one) at a ChessBase Opening Report from my Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) database requires simply continuing to advancing along the move order.

Thus: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ will dig deeper.

According to the Opening Report, White scores "above average" (59%), with 276 wins (57%), 18 draws (4%) and 192 losses (40%). White wins are "shorter than average" (37 moves), Black's wins are "shorter than average" (33 moves) and draws are "short" (30 moves).

Looking at Moves and Plans for Black, 6...Ke6 appeared in 229 games, where Black scored "below average" (38%). Recommended for White is 7.f4, while in the Critical Line White scored only 36%: 7...d6 8.fxe5 dxe5 9.Qh3+ Ke7 10.Qg3.

In 117 games Black played the alternative, 6...Ng6, scoring "below average" (41%). Recommended for White is 7.Qxc5. The Critical Line is then 7...Nf6, against which White has scored only 29%.

In 78 games Black played 6...g6, scoring "below average" (38%). Recommended for White is 7.Qxe5, although in the Critical Line 7...d6 8.Qxh8 Qh4 9.0-0 Nf6 10.c3 White has scored 0%.

An important 6th move alternative for Black, played in 53 games, is 6...Kf8, which scored well (63%). Recommended for White is 7.Qxe5, although the Critical Line, again, is daunting for the first player, as after 7...Qe7 8.Qf4+ White scored 19%.

Finally, Black infrequently played 6...Kf6 (3 games) and scored "miserably" (0%) after White's recommended 7.Qf5+.

Stats (2)

Taking a further look (see "Stats (1)" for a preliminary peek) at a ChessBase Opening Report from my Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) database is as simple as advancing along the move order a bit, and then asking the software to analyze.

So, a look at 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ will dig deeper.

There are 856 games in my database with that line of play. The Opening Report says that White scores "well" with 69%: 510 wins (68%), 21 draws (3%) and 224 losses (30%). In addtion, White's wins are of "average" length (38 moves); Black's wins are "shorter than average" (33 moves); and draws are "short" (29 moves).

Looking at Moves and Plans, 5...Nxe5 was seen in 711 games, where Black scored "badly" 31%. The Opening Report recommends 6.Qh5+ for White, and gives as the Critical Line: 6...Kf8 7.Qxe5 Qe7 8.Qf4+ where White only scored 19%.

A fifth move alternative for Black, 5...Kf8, was seen in 18 games, and Black scored "well" at 56%. The recommended move for White is 6.0-0.

Also possible for Black was 5...Ke8, seen in 8 games, although he scored "miserably" with 0%; 5...Ke7, seen in 2 games, with likewise "miserable" results (0%).

Stats (1)

For what it's worth, let's look at some numbers, based on my Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) database.

Please keep in mind the caveats about this that I mentioned in my reply to Pete Bank's ("blackburne") Comment to "Fool me once..."

I use ChessBase 8 to store most of my Jerome Gambit games and findings.

If I look at the series of moves 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+, and run an Opening Report, I can see that ChessBase finds 1,436 relevant games. About these, it notes that White scores above average – 57%; that is, White wins 693 (55%), Draws 32 (3%), and Black wins 528 (42%). Not surprisingly, it points out that the Drawing number is quite low, with 1/3 of those drawn games having fewer than 20 moves.

In addition, White's wins are "shorter than average" (35 moves), Black's wins are "short" (29 moves), and the Draws are "shorter than average" (34 moves).

Looking at Moves and Plans, I can see that 1217 games featured 4...Kxf7, with which Black scored "averagely" – 44%. The Opening Report recommends 5.Nxe5+ for White, noting that 5...Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 d6 then occured in 97 games; 5...Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 occurred in 118 games; and 5...Nxe5 6.d4 Qh5 7.0-0 Nf6 8.dxc5 Qxe4 9.Nc3 Qb4 10.Nd5 occurred in 118 games. That last line is highly skewed: all 118 games were from a match between Deep Shredder 10 and Rybka 2.3.1.

Interestingly enough, the "Critical line" for White, in which he scored only 29%, is 5.Nxe5+ Kf8 6.Nxc6 dxc6, which certainly bears some looking into.

Althought taking the sacrificed Bishop seems the thing to do, the Opening Report shows that in 19 games Black played 4...Kf8 instead, scoring "below average" at 37%. The recommended response for White is 5.d3.

In 5 games Black responded with 4...Ke7, when he "scored miserably" with 20%. White's response should be 5.Bh5.

Long Lost Cousins & Perfect Strangers

Sometimes, when I'm in a Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) mood, especially when I'm in the position to give "Jerome Gambit odds," I tend to see many openings – some only distantly related to the Italian Game – as Jerome-izeable.

perrypawnpusher - dabbling
blitz 10 0 FICS, 2009


1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 a6

This move was news to me, but I just checked ChessBase's online games database and it has almost 360 examples, played by people like Bogoljubow, Reshevsky, and Steiner, so maybe it's just out of fashion.
4.0-0 Bb4
Ok, this is a bit odd. It reminds me of Alapin's defense to the Ruy Lopez: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Bb4. If I can kick the Bishop back to the 5th rank, though...

5.c3 Ba5 6.Bxf7+


Now, Perry, you know you had a good game with 6.d4...

But, Doctor, I can't help myself!

6...Kxf7 7.Nxe5+ Nxe5 8.Qh5+ g6

Instead, 8...Kf8 9.Qxe5 Bb6 led to a Black advantage.

9.Qxe5 Bb6 10.Qxh8
White is up the exchange and two pawns, but what is equally important is that Black feels like he's slipped and missed a step somewhere.
10...d6 11.Qxh7+ Kf8 12.d4 Qf6 13.Bh6+ Ke8

Rapidly going from bad to worse...

14.Qxg8+ Kd7 15.e5 dxe5 16.dxe5 Qxe5 17.Rd1+ Kc6

18.Qxg6+ Kb5 19.a4+ Ka5 20.b4 checkmate

Double-Perpetual

In a recent "Chess Explorations" by Edward Winter at ChessBase, a game with the opening highlighted in our last post, "A Kind of Jerome Gambit That Wins", progressed 14 moves before a draw was reached, in a rather unusual manner:


1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 Nd7 4.Bc4 h6 5.dxe5 dxe5 6.Bxf7+ Kxf7 7.Nxe5+ Kf6 8.Qf3+ Kxe5 9.Qf7 Ngf6 10.Nd2 Qe8 11.Nc4+ Kxe4 12.f3+ Kf5+ 13.Ne3+ Ke5 14.Nc4+ Kf5+ draw

(For those who are counting, this is daily post #300 to this blog.)

With a lotta help from my friend...

My "thank you" again goes out to N. Earl Roberts (see "Cha - ching!" and "Jerome Gambit: The Proper Perspective") who quickly noticed that the vast majority of entries in the third PGN file of games from this blog are computer vs computer affairs that start from a fixed position – and that such games are handled differently by ChessBase in its "Repertoire" function.

Using an editor, he therefore added the beginning Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) moves and the proper ECO code to each of those games.

Those who have received the earlier, unimproved version of the third file have been sent the updated PGN file.

And Now For Something Completely Different...

This post will touch on the Jerome Gambit, then wander off. I hope everyone will stay with me.

Chessville readers may be familiar with my series "The Kennedy Kids" (loosely based on the chess exploits of Jon, Mary and Matt) especially the one titled "Birthdays With My Friend Jerome" which contains some interesting Jerome Gambit games allegedly played by my youngest.

Anyhow, Jon -- now a senior at the University of Notre Dame -- is spending the summer in Uganda, near Jinja. His blog is worth checking out: http://jbkuganda.blogspot.com/.

I was surprised at the amount of chess going on in Uganda, but have been trying to come up to speed quickly. A good starting place is at Dr. Daaim Shabazz's site, The Chess Drum, where there is a 2002 interview of Daniel Nsibambi, president (at that time) of the Uganda Chess Federation. There is also a profile of the Uganda National Team.

ChessBase has a 2005 story about a chess-playing trip the Uganda team made to Germany.

FIDE has some news on the 2008 East African Chess Championship, and of course there is a website for the Uganda Chess Federation itself.

To date I have not found any Jerome Gambit games or analysis from Uganda -- but, rest assured, I am looking!

My Jerome Gambit Database

I have over 950 Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) games in my database, allowing for transpositions.

I'm always looking for more.

Some are historical

D'Aumiller - A. P.
Livorno, 1878
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 d6 8.d4 Bxd4 9.c3 Bb6 10.fxe5 dxe5 11.Na3 Nf6 12.Qf5+ Kd6 13.Nc4+ Kc5 14.Qxe5+ Kxc4 15.b3+ Kd3 16.Bf4 Kc2 17.Rc1+ Kb2 18.c4+ Ka3 19.Rc2 Re8 1-0

Some are tragic modern over-the-board games

Banks - Rees
Wolverhampton Summer League
Division 3S
Halesowen v Lucas BS, 2003
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Kf8 6.Qh5 Qf6 7.Nxd7+ Bxd7 8.Qxc5+ Qd6 9.Qxd6+ cxd6 10.c3 Nf6 11.f3 Kf7 12.0-0 Rhe8 13.d4 Kg8 14.Bf4 d5 15.e5 Nh5 16.Bg5 Nxe5 17.dxe5 Rxe5 18.Bc1 Bb5 19.Rd1 Rae8 20.Bd2 Re2 21.Na3 Bd3 22.Re1 Nf4 23.Rxe2 Nxe2+ 24.Kf2 Rf8 25.b4 Nf4 26.Bxf4 Rxf4 27.Ke3 Rh4 28.Kxd3 Rxh2 29.Rg1 Kf7 30.Nb5 Rh6 31.Re1 a6 32.Nd4 g6 33.a4 Rh2 34.g4 Ra2 35.a5 Ra3 36.Re5 Ra2 37.Rxd5 Rh2 38.Rd7+ Kf6 39.Rxb7 h5 40.gxh5 gxh5 41.Rb6+ Kg5 42.Rxa6 h4 43.Ne6+ Kf5 44.Ke3 Rc2 45.Nd4+ 1-0

Some are internet beasties

blackburne - karmmark
Jerome Gambit thematic tournament
www.chessworld.net, 2007
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 Nc6 8.Qxc5 Qe7 9.Qd5+ Kf6 10.Qf5 mate

Some are sleepy affairs

Brescak - Hefti
EU-ch U10 Girls, 1998
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ draw agreed.

In all about 7% are over-the-board games, 12% involve computers (person vs computer or computer vs computer), 2% are traditional (snail mail) correspondence games and 79% are games played on the internet (various time controls).

These statistics reflect the explosion of chess in general on the internet – as well as the continued challenge of unearthing historical games, as reflected in the two smallest per centages above. With good reason National Master Eric Schiller includes the Jerome Gambit, despite its untamed early life, among those he calls a "cyberspace gambit" in his Gambit Chess Openings (2002).

In fact, a ChessBase-generated graph of the games, distributed by year played, looks like a very skinny Bozo the Clown taking a nap on his back: his nose beeps up in the mid-1870s to mid-1880s and then there's very little in the sillouette until his large clown shoes explode in the 2000 to present era...