Jerome Countergambit

The following game could just as easily be called "Buttons, buttons, who's got the buttons?" because White wins in the end simply because he has more buttons - er, pawns.

An interesting question of Jerome Gambit nomenclature comes up, however, hence the title of today's post (and the graphic of the counter-puncher).

Wall, Bill - Guest545050

PlayChess.com, 2013

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Kf8 7.Qxe5 Bxf2+ 

Bill Wall suggests that this variation be called the Jerome Countergambit. I think that name is appropriate, as, in the Jerome Gambit, Black executes the same Bishop sacrifice that White played earlier. However, I would like to expand the name to the whole strategy of Black's counter-sacrifice.

Interestingly, in The Database I found only 8 other examples of 7...Bxf2+ as in the current game.

After a different defensive line, however, that of 6...g6 (instead of 6...Kf8) 7.Qxe5 Bxf2+, I found 84 examples.

While readers may not be surprised that after 6.d3 (instead of 6.Qh5+ as in the game) I found only 1 example of the countergambit 6...Bxf2+, it might be shocking to discover that in the "modern" Jerome Gambit line 5.d3 (instead of 5.Nxe5+) there are 842 examples of 5...Bxf2+.

Over the years there have been a number of comments about the ideas behind the Jerome Countergambit, from the thoughts of Brian Wall to today's game by Bill Wall. As for me, I've written a memo: More to explore!

8.Kxf2

Wouldn't you know, one Jerome Gambiteer, the venerable DREWBEAR 63, tried the counter-psych, 8.Ke2!?, and won in 43 moves, in DREWBEAR 63 - Crusader Rabbit, Jerome Gambit Tourney 4, ChessWorld 2009.

8...Qf6+

The alternative, 8... Qh4+, in true Jerome Gambit style, showed up in perrypawnpusher - superlopez, blitz, FICS, 2010 (1-0, 71), which apparently, somehow, was never posted here. (I'll remedy that in a few days.)

9.Qxf6+ Nxf6 

As I've mentioned elsewhere, recently, in a similar situation, "Black has an even game. However, given that he had a won game at move 4, this is not actually progress". Actually, things are worse in this particular case, as Black's exchange of Queens has left him a pawn down.

10.Nc3 g6 

Or 10... d6, as in perrypawnpusher - Lindal, blitz, FICS, 2007, (1-0, 45) 

11.d4 d6 12.Bg5 Kg7 

Moving too quickly. (For a recent, similar example, see "By the Numbers".)

As I've said before: as "bad" as the Jerome Gambit is, it still demands the defender's full attention.

13.Bxf6+ Kxf6 14.Nd5+ Kg7 15.Nxc7 Rb8 16.Nb5 Rf8+ 17.Ke2 Bg4+ 18.Ke3 Rbd8 19.Nxa7 Rde8 

20.Nb5 d5 21.e5 Bf5 22.Nd6 Ra8 23. Nxf5+ Rxf5 24.g4 Rf7 25.h4 Raf8 

26.Rh3 Rf4 27.g5 b5 28.a4 bxa4 29.Rxa4 Rf2 30.Ra7+ Kg8 31.Rc7 Black resigned

Black has nothing against the Queenside buttons.

The Fog of War (Part 1)

It's a strange thing, but playing the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) can have unusual effects upon those who play it or who play against it. The following game is as good an example as any...


DREWBEAR 63 - Crusader Rabbit
JGTourney4 ChessWorld, 2009

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Kf8

A solid defense as old as 1874, when Alonzo Wheeler Jerome suggested it.

7.Qxe5 Bxf2+ An unusual, likely premature, return of material, as in perrypawnpusher - Lindal, FICS 2007.

8.Ke2

Surprising. Perhaps he did not want to play the pawn-up Queenless-middlegame after 8.Kxf2 Qf6+.

8...Qf6

Equally surprising, considering that the Bishop, having done its damage, could retire with 8...Bb6.

9.Qxc7

There was not a lot of excitment in 9.Qxf6+ Nxf6 10.Kxf2 Nxe4+, but it was probably best.

9...Qa6+ 10.d3

10...Bb6

Finally.

11.Rf1+ Nf6 12.Qf4

That's okay: White hopes to win the Knight, anyhow.

12...Bd4 13.c3 Be5

Aha! It is the Bishop, after all!

14.Qxe5 Qe6 15.Qc5+

See what I mean about the impact of the Jerome Gambit. Mind you, each player had several days to consider each move. More helpful would have been 15.Qxe6 dxe6 16.e5, when White has nabbed both the Bishop and Knight.

15...d6 16.Qc7 Bd7 17.h3 Ke7 18.Bg5 Rhf8

19.Nd2 Kf7 20.Nc4 Kg8

21.Nxd6 Nxe4

Oversight or miscalculation? Black's game begins to shudder.

22.dxe4 Rxf1 23.Rxf1 Rf8 24.Rxf8+ Kxf8 25.Qd8+ Be8 26.Nxe8 Qxe8 27.Be7+ Kf7 28.Qxe8+ Kxe8

The exchanges have left White with a won endgame.

29.Ba3 a6 30.b4 Kd7 31.c4 Ke6 32.Kd3 g6 33.Bc1 Kf7 34.a4 Ke6 35.Kd4 b6 36.c5 b5 37.axb5 axb5 38.e5 h5 39.Bh6 Kd7 40.Kd5 Kc7 41.e6 Kd8 42.Kc6 Ke7 43.Kxb5 Black resigned

Sometimes you just have to outplay the other guy...

It's not like you can simply play the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) and win as you please -- in fact, it's kind of like the opposite.

What it comes down to is that sometimes you just have to outplay the other guy.

Or, failing that, you have to make the next-to-last mistake and let him make the last one...

perrypawnpusher - Lindal
FICS rated blitz game 2007

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Kf8 7.Qxe5 Bxf2+



This strategy is similar to the one employed by Pederson (see "Jerome Gambit Strikes in Denmark!") after his 6...g6.8.Kxf2 Qf6+ 9.Qxf6+ Nxf6


"A rather unambitious line on Black's part" as Jerome Gambit Gemeinde member Martin Moller commented in his game against Pederson.

Same here. I'm a pawn up in a balanced position. With some steady work, my advantage should prove itself.

10.Nc3 d6 11.d3 Ke7 12.Bg5 Rf8 13.Rhf1 Ke8 14.Bxf6 Rxf6+ 15.Ke3 Rxf1 16.Rxf1 Be6

If my opponent was content to play against me a pawn down, perhaps he was pleased here with his Bishop vs Knight advantage.

17.a3 Ke7 18.d4 Rf8

Consistent, but not a good idea. Keeping my Kight limited with 18...c6 looks better.

19.Rxf8 Kxf8 20.Nb5 c6 21.Nxa7


Capturing the d-pawn (and, incidentally, making the e-pawn a passer) was less risky.

21...Ke7 22.b4 d5 23.e5 Kd7 24.b5 Kc7 25.bxc6 bxc6 26.a4 Kb7


I have to admit that "losing a Knight" is not the same as "outplaying your opponent".

Even so, White probably can draw by abandoning his piece and a-pawn and focus on marching his King to e8 (or f8 or g8) to help his e-passer promote.

27.Nb5 cxb5 28.axb5 Kb6 29.h3 Kxb5



In a blitz game, anything can happen. Black was willing to play on a pawn down, and he is now clearly winning.

All I had to console myself with was the idea that the guy who allowed White an advantage in the Jerome Gambit was the same guy who let me move through a middle game where White was better. Perhaps he would be just as strong in the endgame.

30.g4 Kb6 31.Kf4 h6 32.h4 Kc6 33.g5 Kd7 34.gxh6 gxh6 35.Ke3 Bf5 36.Kf4 Ke6



Readers with endgame skills are probably beginning to snicker.

37.c3 Bd3 38.Kg4 Be4 39.Kh5 Bd3 40.Kxh6 Kf5


The last two moves have been critical.

With the capture of the pawn, White gained a drawn position: Black's Bishop and King can keep either passer from Queening.

Black's King lurch, however, has given White the advantage. He should have tried something like 40...Be2 when White can make little progress, e.g. 41.Kg5 Bd3 42.h5 Ke7 43.h6 Kf7 44.Kh5 Be4 45.Kg5 Bd3.

41.h5

Well, that didn't last very long. The proper move was 41.Kg7. Now Black can play 41...Be2 and hold the draw.

41...Kg4

Did I mention that this was a blitz game?


42.e6 Bb5 Ok! White is winning again.


My opponent played on, though, no doubt thinking "This guy played the Jerome Gambit against me -- how good could he be?"


43.e7

Back to zero.


It is a challenge to juggle two passed pawns, the opponent's pawn and his Bishop, but it can be done: 43.Kg6 Be8+ 44.Kf6 Kxh5 45.Ke5 Bc6 46.Kd6 Ba4 47.Kxd5 5.19/19 Kg6 48.Kd6 Bb5 49.Ke7 Bc4 50.Kd7 Bb5+ 51.Kd8 Kf5 52.e7 Ke4 53.e8Q+ Bxe8 54.Kxe8 etc.

43...Kf5

The game takes its last rude turn.

After 43...Be8 44.Kg7 Bxh5 the outside passed pawn is captured, and Black has only to trade his Bishop for the other passed pawn with 45.Kf8 Kf5 46.e8Q Bxe8 47.Kxe8 and then "oppose" any attempt by the White King to come to the aid of his pawns: 47...Ke6, etc.

44.Kg7 Kg5 45.h6 Black resigns


graphic by Jeff Bucchino, "The Wizard of Draws"