I won my third round game - an Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit - in the "Italian game Classic" tournament at Chess.com, when my opponent and I seemed to have the same "hallucination" about a tense, tactical position. Up until then, I had been awkwardly struggling to lurch my way back to equality - only to be smacked around by a violent return of my sacrificed material.
Given the distracted level of my play, I consider myself quite lucky.
perrypawnpusher - Sp1derR1c0
Italian Game Classic, Chess.com, 2020
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5
Whew! My game against Winawer99 in the same round continued 4...Nxe4, and I decided to avoid my past suffering with the Noa Gambit / Monck Gambit / Open Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit - 5.Bxf7+ - and played, instead, 5.Nxe4 d5 6.Bd3 dxe4 7.Bxe4 Bd6 8.Bxc6+ bxc6 9.d4, a line that I also have struggled with. It showed: on my way to a possibly drawn Bishops-of-opposite-colors endgame, I overlooked a checkmate in 2 moves (0-1, 21).
5.Bxf7+
The Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit.
What difference does the addition of Knights at c3 and f6 make, when compared to the regular Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+)?
Komodo 10 shows it to improve Black's position by about 3/4 of a pawn.
The Database has 2,731 games with the Four Knights version, with Black scoring 61%. This compares to 15,157 games with the Jerome, proper, with Black scoring 54%.
I have to admit, in my own games, Black scores 25% in my Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit games (62) versus scoring 17% in my regular Jerome Gambit games (336).
5...Kxf7 6.Nxe5+ Nxe5 7.d4 Re8
I like this move. Instead of worrying which piece to save, Black develops another one, on a crucial file. Let White figure it out!
8.dxc5
In preparing this post, I was amused to discover that Komodo 10's second choice, here, was not a capture, but 8.0-0, fully relying on the fact that not all of the pieces will be able to escape, e.g. 8...Bd6 9.f4!? Nc6 10.e5, etc.
That line, in turn, raised a question for me: Has anyone ever tried moving the f-pawn right away, i.e. 8.f4 ? It turns out that The Database has two examples - Svirfneblin - cosmoo, blitz, FICS, 2011 (1-0, 24) and Mvskoke - Panico, blitz, FICS, 2012 (1-0, 36). It is an example of going too far, however, as Black has 8...Bxd4 9.Qxd4 Nc6 and he is doing better than in the normal lines.
By the way, The Database has 6 games with 8.0-0 (Black scores 56%) - and in 3 of them, Svirfneblin had the White pieces. I will have to look at more of his games...
8...Kg8
Finishing castling-by-hand. I have noted
This is an improvement over 8...Nc6 of perrypawnpusher - hudders, blitz, FICS, 2010 (1-0, 13) and 8...Nc4 of the tragic perrypawnpusher - TrentonTheSecond, blitz, FICS, 2010 (0-1, 9),
9.O-O d6 10.cxd6 cxd6
This is probably an improvement over 10...Qxd6, which I faced a couple of times perrypawnpusher - hklett, blitz, FICS, 2013 (1-0, 31) and perrypawnpusher - strandskatan, blitz, FICS, 2013 (1-0, 38). I was prepared, sort of
After the game Houdini recommended the dull 11.Qxd6 cxd6 12.Rd1 with pressure against Black's d-pawn, although Black is still better.
11.Be3
An odd move; the Bishop usually goes to g5. I was planning to play f2-f4, but, for some reason I was worried about ...Qb6+ at some point, so I protected the a7-g1 diagonal. Of course, White's b-pawn is not vulnerable to that enemy double attack, until the Bishop moves. I suspect Caffeine Deficiency Disorder.
11...Be6 12.f3
This is the move that White sometimes plays when he gives up on his plan to attack, and decides to hunker down and challenge Black to do something with his material advantage. Suddenly - comparatively, as the time control was 3 days per move - that became my plan.
The word "collywobbles" comes to mind.
[to be continued]
I recently updated The Database with games from the Free Internet Chess Server, through the end of 2019. The 62,000 games therin represent the largest collection of Jerome Gambit and Jerome-ish openings that I know of.
In addition, because 90+% of the games come from online club play (wins, losses and draws), they are pretty representative of the practical outcome of certain moves or lines. Players can consult their favorite computer (Stockfish, Komodo, Houdini, Crafty, etc.) to get an "objective" assessment of play, and then they can dip into The Database and see how well the lines have fared in play.
There are 15,036 games with the moves 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+, the main line Jerome Gambit.
There are 2,715 games with the moves 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+, the Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit.
There are 207 games with the moves 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.0-0 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ and 160 games with the moves 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+, both variants of the Semi-Italian Jerome Gambit.
There are 148 games with the moves 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.0-0 Bc5 6.Bxf7+, the Semi-Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit.
There are 6,388 games with the moves 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4 4.Bxf7+, The Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit.
There are 2,470 games with the declination 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Na5.
There are 17,582 games with the moves 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Bxf7+, the Abrahams Jerome Gambit.
That leaves about 17,500 miscellaneous games that are Jerome-related, primarily through an early Bxf7+. They are there both to give players ideas about the opening - an for entertainment purposes.
I have struggled to appreciate the Human + Computer vs Computer Jerome Gambit games that Bill Wall has sent me, and this has slowed my presentation of some of them. (For an over-all look, see "Jerome Gambit: Centaurs".)
I suppose that I had expected a series of one-sided crushes, revealing brutal new Jerome Gambit refutations and uncovering scintillating dynamic defenses. It didn't turn out that way - at times the game looks like a positional dance. Let's take a look.
Wall/Stockfish - Crafty
centaur match, 2018
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
Okay, we all should be expecting a win for White - Stockfish is a higher-rated computer program than Crafty, and it is partnered with Bill, who is pretty knowledgeable when it comes to the Jerome Gambit.
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+
Bill played two games with White with Critter as his partner, two with Houdini, two with Rybka, and two wth Stockfish. Each time, he played one 6.Qh5+ game and one 6.d4 game. (6.Qh5+ scored 2 - 4 - 2, while 6.d4 scored 2 - 5 - 1.)
6...Ke6 7.f4 Qf6
Interesting: Black avoids 7...d6, which I have called the annoying or silicon defense, because it annoyingly drains much of the dynamism out of the position, and because it has been a primary choice of computer programs.
The Database has 208 games with 7...d6, with White winning 54% of the time. Instead, it has 133 games with 7...Qf6, with White winning 56% of the time.
8.Rf1 g6
Even computers like to kick the enemy Queen, but 8...d6, working toward development, is probably a little bit better.
9.Qh3+ Ke7 10.fxe5 Qxe5
White has to be careful here (he cannot castle, Black threatens the pawn at e4) and probably should not go into this line without some preparation. That is one suggestion that 6...Qf6 might have been a "book" move inserted by a knowledgeable human.
11.Qf3 Nf6 12.Nc3 c6
The computers tut-tut at this move, which keeps White's Knight off of d5 and prepares ...d7-d5, preferring the more complicated 12...Bd4. They still give Black the advantage after the text.
13.Ne2
Wow. This move has a tactical justification that comes from silicon thinking. Of course, now, 13...Qxe4? would blunder a piece to 14.Qxf6+. It takes a bit more work, however, to see that 13...Nxe4 is met by 14.d4 Bxd4 15.Bf4!?, when 15...Qa4+ 16.c3 d5 17.Nxd4 allows White to recover his sacrificed piece, with a roughly equal game. "Equal", as in mutually complicated; not "drawn".
Instead, a decade ago a couple of computers fought it out after the solid 13.d3 - 13...Bb4 14.Bd2 d6 15.d4 Qe6 16.O-O-O Ng4 17.d5 Qg8 18.Qg3 Ke8 19.dxc6 bxc6 20.Nb5 cxb5 21.Bxb4 Ne5 22.Rxd6 Nc4 23.Qg5 Nxd6 24.Qe5+ Qe6 25.Qxh8+ Kd7 26.Rd1 h5 27.Rxd6+ Qxd6 28.Bxd6 Kxd6 29.Qd8+ Black resigned, Fritz 8 - Fritz 5.32, D1N5TWD1, 2008.
13...Rf8 14.d4
I (sort of) warned you about this move (and the next) in the previous post.
14...Bxd4 15.Bf4 Qc5
It was okay, instead, to take the e-pawn with 15...Qxe4 16.Qxe4+ Nxe4 17.Nxd4, as after 17...g5!? the game would resolve itself into a pawn-plus Queenless middlegame favoring Black with 18.Be3 Rxf1+ 19.Kxf1 d5.
Interestingly enough, 17...d5 (instead of 17...g5!?) would have led to a human game where White ground down his opponent: 18.O-O-O Bg4 19.Rde1 Kd7 20.h3 Bf5 21.Bh6 Rf7 22.Nf3 Re8 23.g4 b6 24.gxf5 Rxf5 25.Nd2 Ng3 26.Rxe8 Kxe8 27.Rxf5 Nxf5 28.Bf4 h5 29.Nf3 Ke7 30.Ne5 Kf6 31.Nxc6 g5 32.Bc7 g4 33.hxg4 hxg4 34.Nxa7 g3 35.Nb5 Kg5 36.Bxb6 Kg4 37.a4 g2 38.Bg1 Kg3 39.a5 Nh4 40.Nd4 Kf4 41.a6 Nf3 42.Nxf3 Black resigned, Vlastous 2344 - Daboa 1799, Chessmaniac.com, 2016.
Black is still for choice, but this is how computer games go - a small slip here, a slight goof there... it all adds up.
16.O-O-O Be5 17.b4
Again: Wow.
Black is close to stabilizing his position with ...d7-d6, so White has to do something.
17...Qb5
This doesn't work. The other (stronger) computers suggest 17...Bxf4+ 18.Qxf4 Qxb4, when 19.Qe5+ Kd8 accents Black's uneasy King and unfinished development. Stockfish 9 then likes 20.Nf4, while Komodo 9 prefers 20.Nd4, both leading to a balanced game, or the slightest edge to Black.
A decade ago, a computer vs computer game saw this continuation: 20.Rxf6 Re8 21.Re6 Rxe6 22.Qxe6 Qf8 23.Qe5 Qe7 24.Qd4 b6 25.e5 Bb7 26.Nc3 c5 27.Qg4 Bc6 28.Qf4 h5 29.Nd5 Bxd5 30.Rxd5 Rc8 31.Qa4 Rc7 32.Qe4 Rc6 33.Qa4 Qe6 34.c4 Rc7 35.Qd1 a6 36.Qe2 Rc6 37.g3 b5 38.h4 bxc4 39.Qxc4 Qf7 40.Qb3 Kc7 41.Qd3 Kc8 42.Rd6 Rxd6 43.Qxd6 Qf1+ 44.Kd2 Qg2+ 45.Kc1 Qc6 46.Qd2 Kc7 47.Qa5+ Kb7 48.Qd2 Qe6 49.Qb2+ Kc6 50.Qg2+ Kb5 51.Qb7+ Ka5 52.Qc7+ Kb4 53.Qb7+ Kc3 54.Qb2+ Kd3 55.Qc2+ Kd4 56.Qb2+ Kd5 57.a3 Qg4 58.Qb7+ Kxe5 59.Qc7+ d6 60.Qe7+ Kd5 61.Qb7+ Ke6 62.Qb3+ Ke5 63.Qb2+ Qd4 64.Qe2+ Kd5 65.Qg2+ Qe4 66.Qd2+ Ke5 67.Qb2+ Kf5 68.Qb8 Qd3 69.Qc8+ Ke5 70.a4 Qc4+ 71.Kd2 Qxa4 72.Qc7 Qd4+ 73.Ke2 Qe4+ 74.Kf2 Qd3 75.Qe7+ Kd5 76.Qe8 Qf5+ 77.Kg1 Kd4 78.Qb8 Ke3 79.Qb3+ Qd3 80.Qf7 Kd2 81.Qa2+ Ke1 82.Qa5+ Qd2 83.Qa1+ Qd1 84.Qc3+ Ke2+ 85.Kh2 Qd4 86.Qa3 Qf2+ White resigned, Fritz 8-Fritz 5.32/D1N5TWD1 2008
18.Nd4 Bxd4
Have to get rid of that annoying Knight, but the exchange opens up dark squares in Black's position. White is now a bit better.
19.Rxd4
19...Kd8
Black's two problems are related: uneasy King and under-development. In the game he works to move the King to a safer place. He should have chosen, instead, 19...d5, unblocking the Bishop that blocks the Rook - a standard defense ailment in the Jerome Gambit. Then, after 20.Bg5 Bg4 21.Bxf6+ Kf7!? 22.Qf4 Kg8, White will probably be able to untangle his pieces, with an edge.
The problem is that White has a powerful response to the text move.
20.Bd6
Remember when the doctor told you "Okay, this is going to hurt a bit"?
20...Qg5+
What else?
21.Kb1 Re8
White now has a forced checkmate in 17 (!), but it is hard to find any acceptible alternative for Black.
Perhaps you are used to seeing computers display their brutal tactical skills, and this game is a good example of how many "positional" games are underlaid by tactical themes.
22.h4 Qxh4 23.e5 Black resigned
Simply brutal. The more you look, the more painful it becomes for Black.
Recently Bill Wall sent me 16 of his Jerome Gambit games that were Human + Computer vs Computer encounters. Such teamwork is sometimes referred to as advanced chess, or cyborg chess, or centaur chess.
Over the years, I have posted games from Human vs Computer matches (including the legendary 1993 Fisher-Kirshner - Knight Stalker battles, and the rolling 2006 RevvedUp - Fritz 8 - Crafty 19.19 - Hiarcs 8 - Shredder 8 - Yace Paderborn mayhem) as well as many Computer vs Computer games, but I think this is the first centaur chess I have presented.
The results are interesting - even if it is difficult to assign the relative impact that the human had on the play. Also, the time controls, which affect the strength of computer programs, are not known.
Over all, White scored 4 - 9 - 3 (34%), which would be unimpressive for a normal opening under normal circumstances, but which seems - as with all Jerome Gambit matches - a bit "high" for a many-times-refuted opening.
A little more insight is available by breaking the games down into 4-game matches.
Crafty vs Stockfish + Wall, for example, yielded 2 wins for Black when played by the team; and, likewise, 2 wins for White when played by the team. With all due respect to Dr. Robert Hyatt's computer engine, it appears it could have been simply outplayed by its stronger computer opponent. Who played what color did not seem to matter.
On the other hand, the Komodo 5 vs Rybka + Wall match, which ended with a score of 2 - 2 - 0, was composed of 4 wins by Black. Neither engine, it appears, was able to ovecome the "handicap" of playing the Jerome Gambit.
The Hiarcs 9 vs Critter + Wall match seemed a reflection of the comparative strengths of the computer programs, as Hiarcs 9 lost 2 games as White, and could only manage a draw as Black.
Interesting, also, was the Fritz 12 vs Houdini + Wall match. The team was 1 - 0 - 1 as White, and 1 - 0 - 1 as Black, suggesting that Houdini was the brighter computer program.
Looking at a couple of lines of play, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.d4 scored 2 - 5 - 1, while 6.Qh5+ scored 2 - 4 - 2, not much of a difference.
I will be sharing some of the games, taking a look at what "theoretical" enlightenment they bring.
Here are some additions to the previous post, which focused upon a line in the Abrahams Jerome Gambit, the game ndizvoh - stevebrown, blitz, FICS, 2015.
After 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Bxf7+ Kxf7 4.Qh5+ g6 5.Qxe5 Bxf2+
6.Ke2
the move 6...Nf6 was suggested as an alternative to 6...Qf6,
He also had the move 6...Nf6, which does the same thing, as 7.Kxf2 would then be met with 7...Ng4+, winning White's Queen.
Examples from The Database:
Rattymouse - bobbybo
blitz, FICS, 2007
1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Bxf7+ Kxf7 4.Qh5+ g6 5.Qxe5 Bxf2+ 6.Ke2 Nf6 7.Kxf2 Ng4+ White resigned
lksharma - oeyvind
blitz, FICS, 2008
1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Bxf7+ Kxf7 4.Qh5+ g6 5.Qxe5 Bxf2+ 6.Ke2 Nf6 7.Kxf2 Ng4+ 8.Ke1 Nxe5 9.d3 Rf8 10.Nh3 Kg8 11.Bg5 Qe8 12.Nd2 d5 13.Ke2 Bxh3 14.gxh3 dxe4 15.Nxe4 Nc4 16.Raf1 Rxf1 17.Rxf1 Nc6 18.Kd1 Nxb2+ 19.Kc1 Qe5 20.Nf6+ Kg7 21.Nd7 Qd6 22.Bf6+ Kh6 23.Bxb2 Qxd7 24.Bc3 Re8 25.Bd2+ g5 26.h4 Kh5 27.Bxg5 Re2 28.Bf6 Qg4 29.Kb2 Qb4+ 30.Kc1 Qa3+ 31.Kd1 Rxh2 32.Rf5+ Kg6 33.Rf4 Rg2 34.Bb2 Rg1+ 35.Ke2 Qe7+ White forfeited on time
xreal - jgknight
blitz, FICS, 2010
1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Bxf7+ Kxf7 4.Qh5+ g6 5.Qxe5 Bxf2+ 6.Ke2 Nf6 7.Kxf2 Ng4+ 8.Ke2 Nxe5 9.Nf3 Nxf3 10.gxf3 d5 11.d3 dxe4 12.fxe4 Bg4+ 13.Kd2 Qg5+ 14.Kc3 Qe5+ 15.Kb3 Be6+ 16.c4 Nc6 17.Rf1+ Ke8 18.Bf4 Nd4+ 19.Kc3 Ne2+ 20.Kd2 Nxf4 21.Nc3 Rf8 22.Ke3 Ng2+ 23.Kd2 Rxf1 24.Rxf1 Qg5+ 25.Kc2 Ne3+ 26.Kb3 Nxf1 White resigned
marciprevi - chesssuperstar
blitz, FICS, 2014
1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Bxf7+ Kxf7 4.Qh5+ g6 5.Qxe5 Bxf2+ 6.Kf1 Nf6 7.Kxf2 Ng4+ 8.Ke2 Nxe5 9.d4 Nc4 10.b3 d5 11.bxc4 Bg4+ 12.Ke3 Qg5+ 13.Kd3 dxc4+ 14.Kxc4 Qxc1 15.Kc3 Bd1 16.Ne2 Qxc2+ 17.Kb4 a6 18.Rf1+ Kg7 19.Na3 Nc6 checkmate
A little further along in the game's notes, I recommended that
White probably should have settled for 7.Qxf6+ Nxf6 8.Kxf2 Nxe4+ and a roughly equal game.
However, a quick look at The Database showed that in 23 games my suggestion scored 72% for Black!?
A consultation with Houdini 3 and Stockfish 6 gave me a clue as to what was going on. While both computer programs agreed that the responses 9.Ke1 and 9.Kf1 led to a balanced game, the move 9.Ke2 (3 games) led to an edge for Black, and the move 9.Ke3 (15 games) led to an advantage for Black. (Both moves are well met by 9...Re8.)
It can be helpful to know what has been played previously, if only to know what moves to avoid!
Finally, it can be noted that after the game continuation, 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Bxf7+ Kxf7 4.Qh5+ g6 5.Qxe5 Bxf2+ 6.Ke2 Qf6 7.Qd5+ Kg7
The Database contains 7 games with this position: 6 losses for White (one of them ndizvoh - stevebrown, blitz, FICS, 2015) and 1 draw.
After this game was finished, I checked with The Database, and discovered that my opponent and I had "discussed" this opening (over the board) several times previously.
In addition, before I post a game on this blog, I usually "discuss" it with either Houdini 3 or Stockfish 6, hoping for enlightenment.
This time, however, my two electronic "friends" did not always agree in the early stages, occasionally sounding like a couple of know-it-all kibitzers, leaving a current assessment of the opening lines a bit unsettled.
Ironically, the game was tipped by the endgame play of both me and my opponent - as HAL 9000 once said, "It can only be attributable to human error."
perrypawnpusher - michon
blitz, FICS, 2015
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4 4.Bxf7+
The Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit.
4...Kxf7
My opponent declined the piece a couple of times, a couple of years ago, with 4...Ke7, but without success: perrypawnpusher - michon, blitz, FICS, 2013 (1-0, 8) and perrypawnpusher - michon, blitz, FICS, 2013 (1-0, 41).
5.Nxe5+ Ke8
Instead, 5...Ke6 was seen in perrypawnpusher - michon, blitz, FICS, 2014 (1-0, 23); while 5...Ke7 was seen in perrypawnpusher - michon, blitz, FICS, 2013 (1-0,18).
6.Qh5+
This move was preferred by Houdini 3 after some deep thought.
Some human input: In over 70% of the over-2,100 relevant Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit games in The Database, White chose 6.Qh5+, scoring 60%.
Instead, Stockfish 6 preferred 6.c3.
Again: In 21% of the relevant Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit games in The Database, 6.c3, was the people's choice, scoring 55%.
I checked, and noticed that 6.c3 was first mentioned on this blog in "Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit", 7 years ago.
Interestingly, an earlier version of Stockfish expressed a preference for 6.c3 about 5 years ago.
The choice of 6.Qa5+ or 6.c3 still seens to be an "Unfinished Discussion" (posted 3 years ago), although it seems that 6.c3 may have appeared in more blog posts than 6.Qh5+.
Here are a couple of examples of the 6.c3 Nc6 7.Nxc6 dxc6 8.d4 Qh4 line suggested by Stockfish 6: 9.0-0 (9.g3 Qxe4+ 10.Qe2 Qxe2+ 11.Kxe2 Bg4+ 12.f3 Bf5 13.Re1 Bxb1 14.Kf1+ Be7 15.Rxb1 Kd7 16.Re2 Re8 17.Be3 Nf6 18.c4 Rhf8 19.b4 Ng4 20.Kg2 Nxe3+ 21.Rxe3 Bxb4 22.Rxe8 Rxe8 23.Rxb4 Re2+ 24.Kh3 Rxa2 25.Rxb7 Ra4 26.Kg4 Rxc4 27.Rxa7 Rxd4+ 28.f4 c5 29.Ra8 c4 30.Rh8 c3 31.Rxh7 c2 32.Rxg7+ Kc6 33.Rg6+ Rd6 34.f5 c1Q 35.Rxd6+ cxd6 36.f6 Qc4+ 37.Kf5 Qf1+ 38.Ke6 Qh3+ 39.Ke7 Qd7+ 40.Kf8 d5 41.f7 d4 42.Kg8 Qg4+ 43.Kh8 Qh5+ 44.Kg8 Qg6+ 45.Kf8 d3 46.Ke7 Qxf7+ 47.Kxf7 d2 48.h4 d1Q 49.h5 Qxh5+ White resigned, marinrouge - homerg, FICS, 2002) 9...Ke7 10.Nd2 Nh6 11.Nf3 Qh5 12.Qd3 Kd8 13.Bg5+ Be7 14.Bxh6 gxh6 15.Ne5 Bd6 16.Qg3 Be6 17.f4 Bxe5 18.fxe5 Rg8 19.Qf3 Bg4 20.Qf7 Qxf7 21.Rxf7 Kc8 22.Kh1 b6 23.Raf1 Kb7 24.Rxh7 h5 25.Rff7 Rac8 26.d5 cxd5 27.exd5 Be2 28.d6 Rgf8 29.Rxc7+ Rxc7 30.Rxc7+ Ka6 31.h3 h4 32.Kh2 Bb5 33.Rg7 Bc6 34.e6 b5 35.d7 Rf6 36.Re7 Bd5 37.d8Q Rg6 38.Qc8+ Ka5 39.Qc7+ Ka4 40.Rg7 Rxg7 41.Qxg7 a5 42.Qd4+ b4 43.cxb4 Black lost on time, dzomba - VendettaA, lightning [!], FICS, 2006.
6...g6 7.Nxg6
7...hxg6
Here we have another dispute.
Stockfish 6 prefers 7...Nxc2+, suggesting that after 8.Kd1 hxg6 (8...Nxa1? 9.Nxh8+ Ke7 10.Qe5#) 9.Qxg6+ Ke7 10.Qg5+ (Houdini prefers 10.Kxc2 with an edge for White) 10...Ke8 11.Qg6+ Ke7 12.Qg5+ White draws by repeating the position (Houdini prefers 12.Kxc2 with an edge for White).
8.Qxg6+
A number of years ago I got away with the weaker 8.Qxh8?! after 8...Nh6 when 8...Nxc2+, instead, would have led to an edge (Houdini) or an advantage (Stockfish 6) for Black after 9.Kd1 Nxa1 10.Qxg8 in perrypawnpusher - tampajake, blitz, FICS 2009 (1-0, 12).
8...Ke7 9.Qg5+ Nf6
Here Stockfish 6 says Black has the advantage, while Houdini 3 says the position is equal.
Both prefer the text to 9...Ke8 of perrypawnpusher - adamzzzz, blitz, FICS, 2009 (1-0, 39).
10.Qc5+
Better than 10.e5 of perrypawnpusher - JokeritT, blitz, FICS, 2010 (1-0, 28).
10...d6
Stockfish 6 slightly prefers 10...Ke8 to the text, while Houdini 3 thinks 10...d6 is better.
11.Qxd4 Be6
Here, Houdini 3 likes White, while Stockfish 6 prefers Black.
Of course.
For the record, I have also seen:
11...c5 in perrypawnpusher - foreverblackman, blitz, FICS, 2010 (1-0, 21) and perrypawnpusher - vlas, blitz, FICS, 2010 (0-1, 23);
11...Qd7 in perrypawnpusher - theferno, blitz, FICS, 2010 (1-0, 28);
and 11...Bg7 in perrypawnpusher - Raankh, blitz, FICS, 2010 (1-0, 49).
12.Nc3
Also possible is 12.f4 c5 when again Houdini 3 likes White, while Stockfish 6 likes Black.
12...Bh6 13.d3 Bxc1 14.Rxc1
Both Stockfish 6 and Houdini 3 suggest 13...c5 first, to displace the White Queen.
White has four pawns for his sacrificed piece. Even if the position is "objectively" even, his prospects are good at club play level.
The next few moves show that both players are blind to some tactical possibilities, however.
14...Qg8 15.g3 Bh3 16.Nd5+?! Nxd5 17.Qxd5? Qxd5 18.exd5 Rae8
Both players overlook the fork 18...Bg2! when Black can grab a pawn and increase Kingside pressure after 19.Rg1 Rxh2 20.c4 Rf8.
19.Kd2 Kd7 20.c4 Re7 21.f4 Rhe8 22.Rce1 Rxe1 23.Rxe1 Rxe1 24.Kxe1
Both computer programs see the position as equal.
What follows goes along with suggestion that a bad plan is better than no plan at all - which is a nice way of saying that my bad idea worked, while my opponent missed some good ideas.
24...Bg4 25.Kf2 Ke7 26.Kg2?! Kf6?!
Black is worried about stopping the Kingside pawns, when he probably should look at using his Bishop to capture a couple of center pawns: 26...Be2 27.d4 Bxc4 28.a3 Bxd5+ 29.Kf2 b6. After this, Black can look to create his own passed pawn, which should counter White's activity.
27.h3 Bd7?!
Again, 27...Be2 was to be preferred. Black's Bishop has to cut down the number of enemy pawns before they become a real problem.
28.g4 Bxg4
This is tantamount to resignation. White can now develop play on both wings. At least one passer is bound to get through.
29.hxg4
29...a6 30.Kf3 c5 31.dxc6 bxc6 32.Ke4 Kg6 33.d4 a5 34.b3 Kf6 35.a3 Kg6 36.b4
Black resigned
Immediately after blundering on move 11, I thought about resigning; but I decided to hold on for a move... then another... then another. Eventually, I held on for the win.
Blitz games can be very strange, and those featuring the Jerome Gambit even more so. Some of the positions in the following game might make up for the questionable play of both me and my opponent.
perrypawnpusher -Toscolano
blitz, FICS, 2015
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 7.Qd5+ Ke8 8.Qxc5 Qh4
Surprisingly a TN according to The Database.
Of note, however, is that after 8...d6 9.Qe3 a successful computer choice was 9...Qh4 in RevvedUp - Yace Paderborn, 2 12 blitz, 2006. In the same competition, 7...Kf8 8.Qxc5+ d6 9.Qe3 Qh4 was seen in RevvedUp - Shredder 8, 2 12 blitz, 2006 and Shredder 8 - RevvedUp, 2 12 blitz, 2006.
9.Nc3 d6
An indication of how weird things were going to get is that after the game Houdini recommended, instead, 9...Qg4 10.Rg1 Kd8.
10.Qe3
I probably could have taken the pawn with 10.Qxc7, but it looked complicated. After the game, Houdini agreed with me: 10...Qg4 11.Nb5 Qxe4+ 12.Kf1 Qe7 13.b3 Bf5 14.Ba3 Qxc7 15.Nxc7+ Kd7 16.Nxa8 Nf6 17.Nc7 Kxc7 18.d3 and things would be about balanced between White's extra Rook plus 2 pawns vs Black's two extra Knights.
analysis diagram
10...Nf4 11.g3
A mindless move, after which I immediately thought of resigning. Of course, White needed to be brave and castle.
11...Ng2+ 12.Ke2 Bg4+
Strong, but even stronger would be 12...Qh5+.
13.f3 Qh3
Black is still better after playing the text, but it was time for 13...Nxe3 14.gxh4 Nxc2 15.Rb1 Bh5, when Black would be up a piece for a pawn.
14.Qf2 Bh5
Black appears repelled by the tactical mess too, and continues to play "safe" and "normal" moves instead of doing concrete analysis - understandable in blitz.
After the game Houdini suggested that Black wade in and keep his advantage with 14...Ne7 15.d3 Rf8 16.Bf4 Nxf4+ 17.gxf4 Rxf4 18.Qg3 Rxf3 19.Qxh3 Rxh3+ 20.Kf2 Kd7.
analysis diagram
15.d3
This is now good enough for equality, while 15.Rg1 would lead to a White advantage.
15...Nf6
This hands over the advantage - not that I was ready to take it! Black could maintain equality with 15...Ne7 16.g4 Bxg4 17.fxg4 Qxg4+ 18.Qf3 Qxf3+ 19.Kxf3 Nh4+.
16.Bg5
I was still floundering. Instead of this reasonable move White should have played 16. Rg1 with an small edge (2 pieces vs Rook) after 16...Rf8 17. Qxg2 Qxg2+ 18. Rxg2 Nxe4 19. dxe4 Bxf3+ 20. Kf1 Bxg2+ 21. Kxg2 Kd7.
analysis diagram
16...h6
Finally letting White off the hook. Instead, Black should have piled on with 16... Ng4, which wins, for example 17.fxg4 Qxg4+ 18.Kf1 (18.Kd2 Qxg5+ 19.Qf4 Nxf4; 18.Qf3 Qxf3+) 18...Rf8 19.Qxf8+ Kxf8 20.Kxg2 Qxg5.
17.Bxf6 gxf6 18.Rag1 f5 19.Qxg2 Qxg2+ 20.Rxg2 fxe4 21.dxe4 Rf8 22.Rf2 c6
The smoke has cleared, and White ("It is better to be lucky than good") is up a couple of pawns.
23.Rd1 Kd7 24.Rd3 Rae8 25.Kd2
An ending slip.
25...d5 26.exd5 cxd5 27.Rxd5+ Kc6 28.Rxh5 Rd8+ 29.Kc1 Rfe8 30. Rxh6+ Kc7 31.Re2 Rf8 32.Re7+ Kc8 33.Rhh7 Rxf3 34.Rc7+ Kb8 35.Rxb7+ Kc8 36.Rhc7 checkmate
Okay, say it with me, "Nobody ever won a game by resigning." Lesson learned.
