I wanted to share another game by TOMMYFOOKINSHELBY (see "Jerome Gambit: Smash Finish") because it answers an unasked question or two... TOMMYFOOKINSHELBY - Fafa05 5 0 blitz, Chess.com, 2020 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6
The Two Knights Defense, often a stumbling block on the way to the Jerome Gambit, although White has options; see, for example, "Jerome Gambit vs Two Knights Defense", parts 1, 2, 3 and 4. 4.Bxf7+ This line doesn't have a name, as far as I know, but it might as well be "the impatient Jerome Gambit". The earliest game that I have with it in The Database is from 2001, but it has to be much older than that. My research is lacking here. Philidor1792, who has contributed much to this blog, explained his approach to the line in "What's Going On Here?" 4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.d4 Ng6
The following game goes mildly along its way, featuring an arcane transposition from a "modern" Jerome Gambit to a Semi-Italian Jerome Gambit. Then, suddenly, the game lurches into deadly waters. And out, again. Of course, Bill Wall is playing the Jerome. Wall, Bill - Guest1507051 PlayChess.com, 2019 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
4...Kxf7 5.d3 Bill plays a "modern" variation of the Jerome Gambit - one without 5.Nxe5. He decides that sacrificing one piece is enough - for now. 5...h6
Black wants to keep a White piece out of g5. The move is playable, but probably not best. Bill has faced the stronger 5...Nf6 three times: Wall,B - Richard123, Chess.com, 2010(1-0, 10); Wall,B - Hovo,D, Chess.com, 2010(1-0, 23); and Wall,B - Bandera,M, Chess.com, 2010(1-0, 28). The move in the game, 5...h6, creates a transposition to the Semi-Italian Jerome Gambit - in this case, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.d3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ Kxf7 - and White decides to capture on e5, after all. 6.Nxe5+ Nxe5 7.Qh5+ Ke6
Quite a shot! Without d2-d3 for White, and ...h7-h6 for Black, as in the current game, this move leads to a complicated and deadly (for White) variation - see "Repairing A Variation" Part 1, 2, 3 and 4for a more complete assessment. I recall getting an email from my friend, "Mad Dog", about a Jerome Gambit correspondence game that he figured he was winning, as he had just won his opponent's Queen - alas, it was a Queen sacrifice, and he was ultimately thrashed. What difference do the "extra" moves make in this case? 11.Kd1 Qd8 Uh, er, never mind. The real test of the line goes something like this: 11...Ne7!? 12.e5+ (White must force the issue) Kc6 13.Qe4+ d5 (the only move to keep Black in the game) 14.exd6+ Nd5 15.gxh4 (there goes the Black Queen, White's only chance) Bg4 16.h3 (in the original line, "Mad Dog" tried Qa4; in a series of games against the computer program Crafty in 2012, Philidor1792 tried d4, and Crafty tried f5; all to no avail) Bh5 17.c4!? (The White Queen does not have to retreat, as she is protected in this line) Ng5+ (best) 18.Kc2 Nxe4 19.cxd5+ Kxd5 20.dxe4+ Kxd621.Nc3 and the game is balanced, as Black's two Bishops counter White's extra, doubled pawn.
analysis diagram In the current game, Black is temporarily up a couple of pieces, but that situation does not last. 12.Qd5+ Ke7 13.Qxc5+ d6 14.Qf2 Bg4
Black cannot save his Knight, and so falls behind by a pawn or two. 15.h3 Nd4+ Better was 15...Nh2+ 16.hxg4 Nxg4. 16.hxg4 c5
17.g5 Kd7 18.Be3 Qb6 19.Kc1 Ne7
The game remains complicated, but White is clearly better. 20.gxh6 gxh6 21.Nd2 Raf8 22.Nc4 Qc6 23.Bxd4 cxd4 24.Qxd4 Kc8
Things begin to slip away. 25.Nxd6+ Kc7 26.Nc4 b6 27.Qe5+ Kd8 28.Qb8+ Nc8 29.Ne5 Qc7 30.Qxc7+ Kxc7 31.Ng6 Black resigned
I just received another Jerome Gambit game played on the internet by Vlasta Fejfar ("vlastous"). The following game show the need for patience in certain lines of that wild, crazy attack. A certain amount of sitzfleisch helps, too. After a period of calm, White suddenly activates his Rooks, and Black does not react well to the danger. [By the way, this is post #2,500 on this blog. As Mortimer Snerd - or Edgar Bergen - said, "Who'd a thunk it?"] vlastous - Nyanyiwa internet, 2017 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
The defense 6...Kf8 is solid and sensible. It can lead to a position where the Queens come off the board before a dozen moves have been played. "Objectively" Black's extra piece is worth more than White's two extra pawns, but in the rough-and-tumble of club play - especially when the first player has knowledge or experience of such lines - there is play to be had for the gambiteer. 9.d3 Qxf4 10.Bxf4 Nf6 11.Nc3
Black has surrendered the Bishop pair to injure White's pawn structure. He still has a long way to go to collect more than a half point, however. In the meantime, White startssome action on the Kingside. 17.Kd2 Bd7 18.g4 h6 19.h4 d5 20.g5 hxg5 21.hxg5 Ng8
White is ready for some action on the Kingside, starting with a surprise. 22.g6+ Kxg6 Immediately, Black slips. He would have done better side-stepping the pawn with 22...Ke6, but he misses White's plan (perhaps because White has been so "quiet" with his play. The capture allows White a useful gain of tempo in response.
23.Rag1+ Kf7 24.Rh7 Ke7
You can see the rest of the game from here. Whites Rooks spring to life. 25.Rgxg7+ Kd6 26.Rxd7+ Kc6 27.Rxc7+ Kb5 28.exd5 Nf6
Black is suddenly 4 pawns down, 3 of them passed, but he hopes to use this Knight fork to win one back. Alas he slips. 29.Rh6 Nxd5 30.c4+ Black resigned
I received a couple of Jerome Gambit games from chessfriend Vlasta Fejfar. The first involves a complicated, frustrating, and, ultimately, philosophical defense. The second is almost off-the-road adventuring. Let's dive into the tough stuff first. After a theoretical opening "discussion" and "scientific" middle game, there follows a textbook attack and a pleasant checkmate. vlastous - franciscoribeiro internet, 2017 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 d6
The annoying "annoying defense" (see 1 and 2 for starters). Computers love it. Vlasta has a lot of experience facing it. Black offers to return one of the two sacrificed pieces. Although his King appears a bit precarious, much of the dynamism in the game is drained off. White need to go into the line with a plan - and a decision about what kind of outcome he is looking for. 8.fxe5 dxe5 9.Qh3+ Kd6 10.Qd3+ Ke7 11.Qg3
Here the game Fejfar,V - Pressl, corr Czech Republic, 2015 was drawn. Is a draw acceptable to White, who started the game with a Bashi-Bazouk attack, sacrificing two pieces? Is a draw acceptable to Black, who, only a few moves ago, had an "objectively" won game? It is a typical Jerome Gambit irony that could be expressed in the idea: Both sides stand better (or worse). 11...Kf8 A little bit better is 11...Kf7, although Vlasta has experience with that line, too: 12.Qxe5 Bd7 (12...Bd4 13.Rf1+ Nf6 14.Qh5+
Kg8 15.Qe2 Be6 16.c3 Be5 17.g3 c5 18.d3 Qd6 19.Bf4 Bg4 20.Qe3 Bh3 21.Rf3
Bg4 22.Rf1 Re8 23.Nd2 Bxf4 24.gxf4 b5 25.e5 Nd5 26.Qg3 Qg6 27.Ne4 c4 28.Kd2 Bf5 29.Nd6 Rd8 30.dxc4 bxc4 31.Rae1 Qxg3 32.hxg3 Ne7 33.Ke3 Bd3 34.Rg1 Nf5+ 35.Nxf5 Bxf5 36.Rd1 Kf7 37.Rd4 h5 38.Rgd1 Rc8 39.Rh1 g6 40.Rh2
Ke7 41.a4 Rc6 42.Rd5 Be6 43.Rb5 Rc7 44.Rd2 h4 45.gxh4 Rxh4 46.Rd4 Rh3+
47.Kf2 Rd3 48.a5 Rxd4 49.cxd4 Bd7 50.Rb8 Ke6 51.Ke3 Kd5 52.a6 c3 53.bxc3
Rxc3+ 54.Kf2 Bc8 55.Ra8 Rc7 56.Ke3 Rc3+ 57.Kf2 Kxd4 58.Rxa7 Ke4 59.Rg7
Kf5 60.a7 Ra3 61.Rf7+ Kg4 62.Rf8 Bb7 63.e6 Rxa7 64.e7 Bc6 65.e8=Q Bxe8
66.Rxe8 Kxf4 67.Rf8+ Kg4 68.Rc8 g5 69.Rc3 Kh4 70.Kg1 Ra2 71.Rb3 g4 draw, Fejfar,V - Goc,P) 13.Qh5+ g6 14.Qxc5 Qh4+ 15.Qf2+ Qxf2+ 16.Kxf2 Nf6
17.d3 Rhf8 18.Nc3 Kg7 19.Ke2 Bg4+ 20.Ke3 Be6 21.h3 Nh5 22.Ne2 Rae8 23.b3
Nf6 24.Ba3 Rf7 25.c4 Rd8 26.Raf1 Rfd7 27.Nf4 Bg8 28.Bb2 Rf8 29.e5 Re7 30.Kd2 Ne8 31.e6+ Black resigned, Fejfar,V - Svoboda, corr Czech Cup, 2016 He has also seen 11...Ke8 12.Nc3 Bd4 13.Rf1 Qd7 14.Nd5 c6 15.Ne3 Nf6 16.d3 Qc7 17.c3 Bxe3 18.Bxe3 Qe7 19.O-O-O
Rf8 20.Rf3 Bd7 21.Rdf1 c5 22.Bxc5 draw, Fejfar - Kyzlink, corr Czech
Republic, 2015. You may have noticed in some of these games Vlasta was testing the Jerome Gambit in correspondence play - like Alonzo Wheeler Jerome did with his gambit over a century ago. A draw is a reasonable outcome. 12.Qxe5 For comparison, a couple of other games: 12. Rf1+ Nf6 13. Qxe5 Bd6 14. Qg5 Bxh2 15. Nc3 Be6 $2 16. e5 h6 17. Qe3 Qe7
18. exf6 gxf6 19. d3 c5 $6 20. Bd2 Rd8 21. O-O-O b6 $6 22. g3 Kg7 23. Rh1 Rd4
24. Rxh2 h5 25. Re1 Kf7 26. Rhe2 Rd6 27. Ne4 Rc6 28. Qf3 Kg6 29. Ng5 fxg5 30.
Qxc6 Kh7 31. Rxe6 Black resigned, Wall,B - Shah,V, chess-db, 2015; and 12.d3 Nf6 13.Rf1 Qe7 14.Nc3 c6 15.Bg5 Kf7 16.O-O-O Rf8 17.h3 Kg8 18.Rf3 Qe6
19.Rdf1 Be7 20.Kb1 Bd7 21.Nd1 Rae8 22.Qh4 b5 23.Ne3 Qd6 24.Qf2 Be6 25.g4
c5 26.Nf5 Bxf5 27.gxf5 Nh5 28.Bc1 Nf4 29.h4 c4 30.d4 Nh5 31.d5 b4 32.Qe2
c3 33.b3 a5 34.a4 bxa3 35.Rxc3 Black resigned, Wall,B - ubluk, Chess.com, 2012. 12...Qh4+
The alternative, 12...Bd6, was seen in a number of games in the legendary Fisher-Kirshner - KnightStalker match in 1993. When people send me Jerome Gambit games, they usually start with Amateur - Blackburne, London, 1884, and then follow with the Fisher-Kirshner - KnightStalker games. The text is sharp and relatively unexplored. The only other game with it in The Database is the computer game WB Nimzo 2000b - La Dame Blanche 2.0c, Jerome Gambit thematic tournament, 2009 - which was a 109 move draw!
13.g3 Qe7 14.Qxe7+ Kxe7
The game has left the path of the computers (which contained 14...Nxe7) and has transposed to 3 games played by Philidor1792 in 2012. 15.Nc3 Alternately, d2-d3 was seen in Philidor1792 - NN, 5 0 blitz, 2012 (1-0, 30) and c2-c3 was seen in Philidor1792 - NN, 5 0 blitz, 2012 (1-0, 22) and Philidor1792 - NN, no time control, 2012 (0-1, 27). 15...c6 Played to keep White's Knight off of d5. Probably better was 15...Nf6, but Black seems to have been nervous about a possible Bishop pin at g5 (see move 17). 16.Na4 Bd6 17.d4 h6 18.O-O
Bh3 19.Rf3 Nf6
A puzzling move. Black gives back his extra piece and secures what should be an even position. Stockfish 8, instead, suggests castling-by-hand on the Queenside, 19...Rf8 20.Bf4 Kd8 21.Nc5 Kc8, with advantage. It must be said that Black is employing the "scientific" idea (as he did on move 7) of accepting the sacrificed material, and then giving it back some time later. 20.e5 Bxe5 21.dxe5 Nd7 Vlasta suggested that 21...Ng4 would have led to an even game. 22.b3
Nxe5
Black is in too much of a hurry to capture the pawn. It will cost him another piece. 23.Re3 Kd6 24.Ba3+ Ke6 25.Rae1 b5 26.Rxe5+ Kf6 27.Bb2 Kg6 28. Nc5 Rad8
White is winning now - he has an advantage in material and a developing attack on the enemy King. 29.Re7 Rhg8 30.Ne6 Bxe6 31.R1xe6+ Kh7 32.
Rxc6 Rd1+
One last Hurrah. White's pressure on g7 is deadly. 33.Kg2 Rb1 34.Bf6 a5 35.Rcc7 Kg6 36.Bxg7 Rd1
I recently referred to the chess clock as "the 33rd piece" (see "Strangest Beast") because it sometimes has a profound effect on the outcome of a game - sometimes as much as a Queen or more. In the following game I have reason to suspect "the 34th piece" - the computer mouse, inputting moves in an online game. Its effect on my opponent's 16th move - if it was a mouse-slip - is rather off-putting and unfortunate. Once again, the truism: In the Jerome Gambit, Black wins by force, White wins by farce. (Well, in my games, anyhow.) perrypawnpusher - aksakal blitz 5 7, FICS, 2017 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ Kxf7
The Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit. I have 59 games with it in The Database, scoring 74%. 6.Nxe5+ After the game I was interested to discover in The Database the game olivercsc - aksakal, FICS, 2015, in which Black outplayed his opponent, but was done in by his clock: 6.O-O h6 7.d3 d6 8.h3 Rf8 9.Bxh6 gxh6 10.Nd5 Nxd5 11.exd5 Nd4 12.a3 a5 13.Nd2 Qg5 14.Ne4 Qg6 15.Ng3 Kg8 16.Qh5 Qxh5 17.Nxh5 Nxc2 18.Rac1 Nd4 19.Kh1 Ne2 20.Rce1 Nf4 21.Ng3 Bd7 22.Ne4 Nxd3 23.Rd1 Nxf2+ 24.Nxf2 Rxf2 25.Rxf2 Bxf2 26.Rd3 Rf8 27.b4 Bg3 28.Rxg3+ Kh7 29.bxa5 e4 30.Kh2 Ba4 31.Re3 Bc2 32.Rc3 Bd3 33.Rxc7+ Kg6 34.Rxb7 e3 35.Rb6 e2 36.Rxd6+ Kg5 37.h4+ Kg4 38.Re6 Black forfeited on time. My Jerome Gambit probably did not worry my opponent a bit. 6...Nxe5 7.d4 Ng6
A novelty. The Knight sometimes goes to g6 in other lines of the Jerome Gambit. Here, best is 7...Bd6. Interestingly enough I have only faced that move twice, and am 1-1. That lack of "best" play reinforces Bill Wall's understanding of the opening's "playability" in casual, online, and fast games - the Jerome Gambit's "refuted" nature is often counter-balanced by the defender's lack of concrete knowledge about those refutations. 8.dxc5 Re8 9.Bg5 h6 10.Bxf6 Qxf6 11.O-O Kg8
Black has castled-by-hand and has his Rook on an open file. 12.f4 d6 13.cxd6 Qxd6 14.Qxd6 cxd6 15.Rad1 Be6
My opponent took some time deciding on the offer to exchange Queens. I agreed to the swap, immediately - which caused him to take some more time figuring out what I was up to. I admit to being under the influence of the recent Philidor1792 bullet games posted on this blog. If our clocks were going to run down (his faster than mine, so far) I was going to be comfortable with a simpler position. 16.Rxd6 An immediate example of "simpler". I suspect that my opponent expected me to play the fork 16.f5, although 16...Bc4 17.fxg6 Bxf1 18.Rxf1 Re6 was probably even, as White would wind up with one or two pawns for the exchange. 16...Ne5 It is hard to read this as anything other than a mouse-slip. What to do about the threatened pawn fork? Black could keep busy with 16...Rad8 17.Rxd8 Rxd8 and then 18.f5 could again be answered by 18...Bc4 19.Rd1 (I prefer this to 19.fxg6) Rxd1+ 20.Nxd1Ne5 and White will move his King to the center, counting on that - and his 3 pawns for the piece - to fight against Black's edge (especially with the time clock advantage). 17.fxe5 Black resigned
