As I suspected earlier, playing the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) against an opponent rated 400 points above me (in one of the two Italian Opening tournaments that I am involved in at Chess.com) proved to be a formidable task. I did not make the best of my chances, while my opponent played steadily and pocketed the full point.
Losing the following game leaves me at 4 - 1 in the first tournament, needing a win in my remaining game (I have Black) to move on to the next round. The Jerome Gambit has scored 2-1 for me, with my other tournament wins coming in the endgame with Black.
In the other tournament, I am sitting with 1 win against four losses. One of the incomplete games should be another endgame win with Black. One is a Jerome Gambit that just started (I have White), and, with luck, the last one will be a Jerome as well.
perrypawnpusher (1740) - JoseSoza (2080)
Italian Game tournament, Chess.com, 2012
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+
The Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit.
5...Kxf7 6.Nxe5+ Nxe5 7.d4 Bxd4 8.Qxd4 d6 9.O-O Re8 10.Bg5
This is possibly a slight improvement over 10.f4 from perrypawnpusher - KaZC, blitz, FICS, 2010 (1/2-1/2, 61) and perrypawnpusher - Fazmeister, blitz, FICS, 2011 (1-0, 36).
10...Nc6 11.Qd3 Be6 12.f4 Kg8 13.Rae1 Bf7
14.a3
I was not sure what to do here, so I tried the text, thinking at least it would not hurt me. Black's response gave me something to work with.
14...Qc8 15.Bxf6 gxf6 16.Qg3+
After the game Rybka suggested a Rook feint on the Kingside to grab a pawn on the Queenside: 16.Re3 Qd7 17.Rh3 Rad8 18.Rff3 Ne7 19.f5 Kh8 20.Qe3 Ng8 21.Qxa7 Qc6 22.Qf2 Qc5. That's a bit above my playing level.
16... Kh8 17.Qh4 Qd8
18.Nd5 Bxd5 19.exd5 Rxe1 20.Rxe1 Nd4 21.Qf2 Nf5 22.g4
I was pretty sure that this was not the "best" move (Rybka later recommended 22.Qf3) but I was hoping that Black would retreat and misplace his Knight.
22...Ng7 23.Qd4 Qd7 24. f5 Re8 25.Kf2
The game is slipping away. Rybka cold-bloodedly suggested 25.Rxe8+ Nxe8 26.Qxa7 Qe7 27.Qxb7 Qe2 28.h3 h5 29.Qb4 Qd1+ 30.Kf2 Qxc2+ 31.Ke1 Qd3 32.Qd2 Qg3+ 33.Kd1 Qb3+ 34.Kc1 Qc4+ 35.Kb1 hxg4 36.hxg4 Qxg4 37.Qc2 Qf3 38.Qc6 Ng7 39.a4 when White still has some play.
25...Rxe1 26.Kxe1 Qe7+ 27.Kf2 h5 28.h3 b6
I decided to play on, as long as Black's Rook was misplaced. When that was exchanged, I decided to play on as long as Black's Queen was misplaced. Later, I played on because Black's Knight was misplaced...
29.Qe3 Qe5 30.Qxe5 dxe5 31.c4 Ne8 32.b4 Nd6 33.c5
bxc5 34.bxc5 Ne4+ White Resigned
A very solid demonstration by my opponent.
More "muddlegame" blues: White has all the makings of an attack on the enemy King – well, almost all – but his efforts look like someone trying to put together a 1,000 piece puzzle when some of the parts are missing. After such a failure, to win the game based on what seems to be an optical illusion makes things even more bizarre.
perrypawnpusher - Fazmeister
blitz, FICS, 2011
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5
The Italian Four Knights Game.
5.Bxf7+
The Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit.
5...Kxf7 6.Nxe5+ Nxe5 7.d4
7...Bxd4 8.Qxd4 Re8 9.0-0 d6
10.f4
A standard move in this kind of position, but probably 10.Bg5, as in Wall,B - Foman, Chess.com, 2010 (1-0, 22) was stronger.
10...Nc6 11.Qd3 Kg8 12.Bd2 Kh8
The King's cautious double-move eliminates the risk of a Queen-check-and-fork at c4, should Black move a piece to b4 to attack Her Majesty. Previously I had seen 12...a6 13.Rae1 Kh8 in perrypawnpusher - KaZC, blitz, FICS, 2010 (½-½, 61).
Actually, in my post on the KaZC game, I said I'd try 10.Bg5 "next time", but I forgot to...
13.Nd5
Another "standard move in this kind of position", but with Black's Rook at e8 this should simply lose the e-pawn.
13...Nxd5
A curious example of "playing the player" (or "playing the player's misconceptions") rather than "playing the board." Folie a deux?
14.exd5 Nb4
I don't know what to say. Some people just want to attack my Queen. Now that there is no insidious check-fork (see my comment to Black's 12th move) my opponent goes ahead...
15.Bxb4 a5
White has regained his sacrificed piece and is even a pawn up.
One look at Black's undeveloped Queenside suggests that White should focus an attack on the enemy King, using the a1-h8 diagonal and possibly the g-file as well.
That much, I understood. But I could not put the attack together.
16.Bc3 b6 17.Qd4
This move is adequate, but after the game Houdini suggested the cold-blooded 17.f5 Ba6 18.Qg3 Qd7 19.f6, since 19...Bxf1 is only a temporary material gain for Black, as he quickly has to return the exchange with 20.Rxf1 Re5. After 21.Bxe5 dxe5 22.Qxe5 Qf7 23.fxg7+ Qxg7 Black has turned back the attack, but he is two pawns down without any compensation at all.
The idea of an attack that does not necessarily end up with checkmate, but which is "expensive" for the opponent to defend against, is part of middlegame play (in my games, "muddlegame play") that I'm still trying to understand.
One of the "missing pieces" in my own construction of the attack was the move f4-f5.
17...Re7
Stronger was 17...Qf6, because the text move makes the Rook a target after f4-f5-f6; but I was oblivious to that.
18.Rae1
Solid, but take a look at 18.f5 Rf7 19.f6 Rxf6 20.Qxf6!? gxf6 21.Bxf6+ Qxf6 22.Rxf6 when White has the exchange and a pawn to comfort him for his "failed" attack on the King.
18...Rf7 19.Re3
Planning to transfer the Rook to the g-file, but without the "can opener" f4-f5 the attack will not be sufficient.
19...Bf5
20.Rg3
With the arrival of Black's Bishop, his Kingside is almost secure.
20...Qd7 21.Rff3 Bxc2 22.f5
The pawn finally takes a step, but it turns out now that the Rook sacrifice at g7, which I try a move later, is the key here: 22.Rxg7 Rxg7 23.Rg3 Bg6 24.f5 Re8 25.fxg6 Re5 26.Qd3 Qa4 27.Qf3 Qe8 28.gxh7 Kxh7 29.Rxg7+ Kxg7 30.Bxe5+ dxe5. White is up a pawn in a Queen + pawns endgame; and at our level of play, in blitz, that's probably what they call "3/4 of a point" (i.e. a draw, with a big sigh).
22...Raf8 23.Rxg7
I was thinking "something like this should work", which is a very bad substitute for analysis. I had also lost my patience, which is a very bad substitute for actually playing chess.
It was better to stay the course, as Houdini showed afterward: 23.Rg5 b5 24.Rfg3 Rg8 25.f6 g6 when White is better, but he will probably have to sacrifice the exchange to break through. The win is a long ways off.
23...Rxg7 24.Rg3
The sad fact is that Black has adequate defensive resources, and White will end up with a pawn for a piece.
24...Rff7 25.Rxg7 Rxg7 26.Qf2 Be4 27.Bxg7+ Qxg7 28.f6 Qf7 29.g4 Bxd5
It is hard to believe that this is the same game that I was playing 4 diagrams back. White is simply busted.
30.g5 Bxa2 31.h4 Bb1 32.h5 c5 33.Qf4 Ba2 34.Qxd6 Qxh5
I think the only explanation for this move is that my opponent has been looking at moves for his pieces along the light squares, while he has been assessing my Queen's movements along the dark squares. Kind of an optical illusion.
Well, that, and maybe a shortness of time on the clock.
35.Qf8+ Bg8
Of course.
36.Qg7 checkmate
Well, that was far better than I expected.
(It looks like I need a serious refresher course on attacking the King, starting with Joel Johnson's Formation Attacks.)
Have you ever played what you thought was a smashing attack – only to discover, upon closer inspection, that it wasn't nearly as sound as you (and your opponent) imagined? If you play the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) – of course you have.
perrypawnpusher - Philidork
blitz FICS, 2010
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nc6 4.Bc4 Bc5
5.Bxf7+
The Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit, one of those lines known to me personally as the Why-Am-I-Still-Playing-This Opening??
5...Kxf7 6.Nxe5+ Nxe5 7.d4 Bxd4 8.Qxd4
This seems to be the most popular defense, although 7...Bd6 8.dxe5 Bxe5 was stronger.
8...d6 9.Bg5
Or the alternative: 9.0-0 Re8 10.f4 (10.Bg5 Kg8 11.f4 Nc6 12.Qd3 Nb4 13.Qc4+ Be6 14.Qxb4 b6 15.Rae1 c5 16.Qb5 d5 17.e5 d4 18.exf6 a6 19.Qc6 Bd7 20.Qd5+ Kh8 21.fxg7+ Kxg7 22.Bxd8 Black resigned, Wall - Foman, Chess.com, 2010) 10...Nc6 11.Qd3 Kg8 12.Bd2 a6 13.Rae1 Kh8 14.Nd5 Nxd5 15.exd5 Rxe1 16.Rxe1 Na7 17.Qe4 Bg4 18.h3 Bh5 19.g4 Bf7 20.Bc3 Qe8 21.Qf5 Qf8 22.Qd7 Nb5 23.Re7 Nxc3 24.Rxf7 Qe8 25.Qxe8+ Rxe8 26.bxc3 Kg8 27.Rxc7 b5 28.Kf2 Re4 29.f5 Ra4 30.Rd7 Rxa2 31.Rxd6 Rxc2+ 32.Ke3 Rxc3+ 33.Kd4 Rc4+ 34.Kd3 Rc5 35.Rxa6 Rxd5+ 36.Ke3 Rd1 37.Rb6 Rb1 38.Kd4 Kf7 39.g5 Kg8 40.g6 Rd1+ 41.Ke5 Re1+ 42.Kf4 Re8 43.Rxb5 hxg6 44.fxg6 Rf8+ 45.Rf5 Rxf5+ 46.Kxf5 Kf8 47.Ke6 Kg8 48.Ke7 Kh8 49.h4 Kg8 50.h5 Kh8 51.Ke6 Kg8 52.Kf5 Kh8 53.Kg5 Kg8 54.Kf5 Kh8 55.Ke5 Kg8 56.Ke6 Kh8 57.Kd7 Kg8 58.Ke7 Kh8 59.h6 Kg8 60.h7+ Kh8 61.Kf8 Game drawn by stalemate, perrypawnpusher - KaZC, blitz FICS, 2010.
This position is of historical interest, as it appeared in two games in a Jerome Gambit correspondence chess match between Alonzo Wheeler Jerome and S.A. Charles, presented in an article by Charles in Brentano's Chess Monthly, October 1881.
The move order in those games was 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.d4 Bxd4 7.Qxd4 d6 8.Nc3 Nf6 9.Bg5.
9...Nc6
Or 9...h6 10.Bxf6 Qxf6 11.0-0-0 Be6 12.Kb1 Nc4
analysis diagram
"so far from an unfinished game between Mr. Jerome and the writer, the following seems a possible continuation 13.Qd3 b5 14.f4 Nxb2 15.Kxb2 b4 and wins." Jerome - Charles, correspondence, 1881;
analysis diagram
Also possible was 9...Bh3 10.0-0-0 Bxg2 11.f4 h6 12.Bxf6 gxf6 13.Rhg1 Bh3 14.fxe5 "better game [for White]. from a game between Mr. Jerome and the writer"
10.Qd3
10...Re8 11.0-0 Kg8
12.Nd5 Re6 13.Nxf6+
Part of a "plan of attack," but 13.f4 followed by 14.e5 was more sensible.
13...gxf6 14.Bh6
14...Ne5
After I played my 14th move, I suddenly wondered, what if Black plays 14...f5...? The answer is, of course, that White's "attack" crumbles.
The move played by Philidork shows that he sees my plan to check along the g-file, and he hastens to cover up.
15.Qg3+ Ng6
Now White can achieve an even game with the straight-forward 16.f4 Rxe4 17.f5.
16.h4 Kh8
White "attacks" with the h-pawn, which can be stopped by the simple 16...Re5.
17.h5
Unfortunately, my opponent was taken in by all of this and resigned here.
True, if the Knight moves, White can checkmate at g7. But Black is a piece ahead, so he can afford to defend with 17...Qg8 – when all I would have after 18.hxg6 Qxg6 was an even game.
Looking back, the situation was not as scary as it looked.
Here we have another example of that odd cousin of the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+), the Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit. I've begun to "just play it" with no more concern than a walk in the park.
perrypawnpusher - Avious
blitz FICS, 2010
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5
The Italian Four Knights Game.
5.Bxf7+
The Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit.
5...Kxf7 6.Nxe5+ Nxe5 7.d4
The updated New Year's Database has almost 200 games with this position, with White scoring 46%. (I guess my 3 wins and 2 draws helped.)
7...Bxd4 8.Qxd4 Nc6
This position – with 0-0 and ...h7-h6 added – has appeared twice in my games: perrypawnpusher - mjmonday, blitz FICS 2010 (0-1, 26 ); and perrypawnpusher - DeDaapse, blitz FICS 1010 (0-1, 19).
Instead of 8...Nc6, Black also had 8...Re8: 9.0-0 d6 10.f4 Nc6 11.Qd3 Kg8 12.Bd2 Nd5, b3 12...a6 13.Rae1 Kh8 14.Nd5 Nxd5 15.exd5 Rxe1 16.Rxe1 Na7 17.Qe4 Bg4 18.h3 Bh5 19.g4 Bf7 20.Bc3 Qe8 21.Qf5 Qf8 22.Qd7 Nb5 23.Re7 Nxc3 24.Rxf7 Qe8 25.Qxe8+ Rxe8 26.bxc3 Kg8 27.Rxc7 b5 28.Kf2 Re4 29.f5 Ra4 30.Rd7 Rxa2 31.Rxd6 Rxc2+ 32.Ke3 Rxc3+ 33.Kd4 Rc4+ 34.Kd3 Rc5 35.Rxa6 Rxd5+ 36.Ke3 Rd1 37.Rb6 Rb1 38.Kd4 Kf7 39.g5 Kg8 40.g6 Rd1+ 41.Ke5 Re1+ 42.Kf4 Re8 43.Rxb5 hxg6 44.fxg6 Rf8+ 45.Rf5 Rxf5+ 46.Kxf5 Kf8 47.Ke6 Kg8 48.Ke7 Kh8 49.h4 Kg8 50.h5 Kh8 51.Ke6 Kg8 52.Kf5 Kh8 53.Kg5 Kg8 54.Kf5 Kh8 55.Ke5 Kg8 56.Ke6 Kh8 57.Kd7 Kg8 58.Ke7 Kh8 59.h6 Kg8 60.h7+ Kh8 61.Kf8, drawn by stalemate, perrypawnpusher - KaZC, blitz FICS, 2010
9.Qc4+ Ke7
Instead, 9...d5 was a bit better.
10.0-0 Re8 11.Bg5 Kf8 12.f4 h6
This should lead to an even game, although it actually introduces a series of misplays by both sides.
After the game Rybka suggested an interesting line for Black, giving up two pieces for a Rook and coming out with a simplified position the exchange ahead: 12...d6 13.e5 Be6 14.Qb5 a6 15.Qxb7 Qd7 16.f5 Bxf5 17.Rxf5 Qxf5 18.Bxf6 gxf6 19.Qxc6 Qxe5.
analysis diagram
13.Bh4
Rybka's post mortem suggestion was: 13.Nd5 Rxe4 14.Qxe4 Nxe4 15.Bxd8 Nxd8 16.Nxc7 Rb8 when White has a Rook and a Pawn for Black's Knight and Bishop; about even.
analysis diagram
13...a6
More useful was 13...d6, but Black has decided to strike out on both wings.
14.e5 b5
See "Perhaps the best chess advice that I ever read..."
15.Qd3 g5
This is over-doing it, however, and should lead to disaster.
16.fxg5 Nxe5 17.Rxf6+
A few moves later, I wondered where my attack and advantage had gone. This move is a mistake, while 17.Qh7 would have been very strong.
17...Qxf6 18.gxf6 Nxd3 19.cxd3 Bb7
Black has the exchange for a pawn, and is better.
I couldn't believe that I had lost my way.
20.g4 Kf7 21.g5 hxg5 22.Bxg5 Rg8 23.h4
Establishing the two passed pawns. My plan looks frail, but it was the best that I could come up with.
23...d5 24.Re1 d4
Black has pawns that he wants to start moving, too. This move allows a critical tempo for me to get my Rook into the thick of things, though – something that 24...Rae8 would have prevented.
25.Re7+ Kg6 26.Ne2 Rae8
27.Nf4+ Kf5 28.f7 Rxg5+
29.hxg5 Rf8 30.g6 Kf6
31.Rxc7
After the game, Rybka pointed out that here I had a mate in 12 with 31.Re6+.
At the time I saw how to slowly improve my position, and I decided to grind things out, especially since my opponent was running low on time.
31...Bc8 32.Nd5+
32...Kg7 33.Ne7 Be6 34.Rc6 Bxa2
Readers may notice (I didn't) that this allows a creative mate in 3: 35.Nf5+ Kh8 36.g7+ Kh7 37.Rh6 #
analysis diagram
35.Rxa6
35...Bxf7 36.gxf7 Rxf7
A consequence of my un-hurried strategy, but the game is still well in hand for White.
37.Nd5 Rf3 38.Nb4 Re3 39.Kf2 Re5 40.Rd6
At this point Black lost on time.
