The Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) is largely known for its wild "Bashi-Bazouk" style of attack. However, in the following game, Bill Wall, with over 950 games in The Database, shows he can play the Jerome slow and easy, as well.
Wall, Bill - Guest190971
PlayChess.com, 2020
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
4...Kxf7 5.Nc3
This is one of the "modern" Jerome Gambit variations. The "classical" lines continue with 5.Nxe5.
5...d6
Bill has also seen:
5...Nf6 6.Qe2 d6 (6...Rf8 7.Qc4+ Ke8 8.Qxc5 d6 9.Qc4 Qe7 10.d4 exd4 11.Nxd4 Nxe4 12.Nxc6 Qh4 13.O-O Rxf2 14.Nxe4 Rxg2+ 15.Kxg2 Bh3+ 16.Kh1 Qg4 17.Qf7 Wall,B - Roberts,C, Chess.com, 2010) 7. Na4 Nb4 8. Qc4+ Ke8 9.a3 b6 10.axb4 Bxb4 11.Qxb4 Bg4 12.Nc3 c6 13.d4 d5 14.Nxe5 Black resigned, Wall,B - Guest153817, PlayChess.com, 2018; and
5...h6 6.Nxe5+ Nxe5 7.Qh5+ Ng6 8.Qd5+ Ke8 (8...Kf8 9.Qxc5+ N8e7 10.f4 d6 11.Qf2 Nc6 12.d4 Qh4 13.g3 Qh3 14.f5 Nge7 15.f6 Nf5 16.exf5 Bxf5 17.fxg7+ Kxg7 18.Nd5 Rhf8 19.Nf4 Rae8+ 20.Be3 Qg4 21.h3 Qg5 22.O-O-O Nb4 23.Qd2 Qxg3 24.Nh5+ Black resigned, Wall,B - Jllib976, Chess.com 2010) 9.Qxc5 d6 10.Qa3 N8e7 11.O-O Nh4 12.d4 Neg6 13.f4 Rf8 14.Be3 Bg4 15.Qb3 Rb8 16.f5 Ne7 17.Bf2 Nexf5 18.exf5 Nxf5 19.Rae1+ Kd7 20.Qe6+ Kc6 21.d5 checkmate, Wall,B - Mbgmx, Chess.com 2010
6.d3
Or 6.O-O Bg4 7.d3 Nd4 8.Nxe5+ dxe5 9.Qxg4 Nf6 10.Qd1 c6 11.Na4 Bd6 12.Be3 Ne6 13.Qd2 Qc7 14.Nc3 Rad8 15.Ne2 Rhf8 16.Qc3 Kg8 17.Qb3 Rde8 18.Bxa7 Kh8 19.Be3 Ng4 20.Bb6 Qb8 21.h3 Nf6 22.Ng3 Nd4 23.Qc4 Nd7 24.Bxd4 exd4 25.Qxd4 c5 26.Qa4 Rd8 27.Nf5 Nb6 28.Qb5 Qc7 29.Ne3 Qc6 30.Qxc6 bxc6 31.a4 Ra8 32.a5 Nd7 33.Nc4 Be7 34.e5 Rfb8 35.b3 h6 36.f4 Bd8 37.a6 Nb6 38.Na5 Rxa6 39.Nxc6 Rxa1 40.Rxa1 Rc8 41.Nxd8 Rxd8 42.Ra5 Ra8 43.Rxc5 Ra2 44.c4 Rd2 45.e6 Rxd3 46.e7 Re3 47.Re5 Black resigned, Wall,B - Rahman,N, Chess.com 2010
6...h6 7.Na4 Bb4+ 8.c3 Ba5 9.O-O Nf6
10.h3 b5
Black believes he has trapped White's offside Knight. He is mistaken. In his attempt to hold things together, he surrenders his advantage.
11.Qb3+ d5
Bill suggests 11...Kg6 12.Qxb5 Qe8 and White has grabbed the pawn, but he still has work to do.
12.Qxb5 Qd6
This move doesn't work. Why not?
13.exd5 Qxd5 14.Qxc6 Qxc6 15.Nxe5+ Ke6 16.Nxc6 Bb6
White is now ahead 3 pawns, and Black's Bishop pair and slightly better development are not adequate compensation.
17.Bf4 Nd5 18.Rfe1+ Kf5 19.Re5+
This looks like a simple attempt to exchange his Bishop for the Knight, but it is more than that.
19...Kxf4 20.g3+ Kf3 21.Nxb6 axb6 22.Nd4 checkmate
Very nice.
graphic by Jeff Bucchino, "The Wizard of Draws"
!
The following game (with interesting lessons) is one that I have referred to a number of times on this blog, but never presented it in full, or with notes. I am only 6 years late, but, here we go...
Wall, Bill - Roberts, Conner
Chess.com, 2010
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
4...Kxf7 5.Nc3
Bill chooses one of the "modern" Jerome Gambit lines. As far as I can tell, in the days of Alonzo Wheeler Jerome, the "classical" 5.Nxe5 was always played.
5...Nf6
A few games with different responses, to study:
5...d6 6.O-O Bg4 7.d3 Nd4 8.Nxe5+ dxe5 9.Qxg4 Nf6 10.Qd1 c6 11.Na4 Bd6 12.Be3 Ne6 13.Qd2 Qc7 14.Nc3 Rad8 15.Ne2 Rhf8 16.Qc3 Kg8 17.Qb3 Rde8 18.Bxa7
Kh8 19.Be3 Ng4 20.Bb6 Qb8 21.h3 Nf6 22.Ng3 Nd4 23.Qc4 Nd7 24.Bxd4
exd4 25.Qxd4 c5 26.Qa4 Rd8 27.Nf5 Nb6 28.Qb5 Qc7 29.Ne3 Qc6 30.Qxc6
bxc6 31.a4 Ra8 32.a5 Nd7 33.Nc4 Be7 34.e5 Rfb8 35.b3 h6 36.f4 Bd8 37.a6 Nb6 38.Na5 Rxa6 39.Nxc6 Rxa1 40.Rxa1 Rc8 41.Nxd8 Rxd8 42.Ra5 Ra8 43.Rxc5 Ra2 44.c4 Rd2 45.e6 Rxd3 46.e7 Re3 47.Re5 Black resigned, Wall,B - Rahman,N, Chess.com, 2010; and
5...h6 6.Nxe5+ Nxe5 7.Qh5+ Ng6 8.Qd5+ Ke8 (8...Kf8 9.Qxc5+ N8e7 10.f4 d6 11.Qf2 Nc6 12.d4 Qh4
13.g3 Qh3 14.f5 Nge7 15.f6 Nf5 16.exf5 Bxf5 17.fxg7+ Kxg7 18.Nd5 Rhf8 19.Nf4 Rae8+ 20.Be3 Qg4 21.h3 Qg5 22.O-O-O Nb4 23.Qd2 Qxg3 24.Nh5+ Black resigned, Wall,B - Jllib976, Chess.com, 2010) 9.Qxc5 d6 10.Qa3 N8e7 11.O-O Nh4
12.d4 Neg6 13.f4 Rf8 14.Be3 Bg4 15.Qb3 Rb8 16.f5 Ne7 17.Bf2 Nexf5 18.exf5 Nxf5 19.Rae1+ Kd7 20.Qe6+ Kc6 21.d5 checkmate, Wall,B - Mbgmxm, Chess.com, 2010.
6.Qe2
Here Black's brain should be screaming "Why Did He Play That Move?" I guess it wasn't. After all, he was playing against a ridiculous opening, and it was easy to feel comfortable and conficent and slow down his effort...
6...Rf8
To be fair, this move is often part of castling-by-hand to give Black's King needed safety. However, it is not well-timed.
7.Qc4+ Ke8 8.Qxc5 d6 9. Qc4 Qe7
10.d4 exd4 11.Nxd4
Nxe4
Black is down a pawn, so, of course, he plays to get one back, and there seems to be one available (with White's King uncastled on the same file as Black's Queen!) but in this case he seems to have been affected by the "negative halo effect"
When people notice a good trait in a person, they often assume other positives. With the Jerome Gambit often a negative "halo effect" occurs – if the early moves are bad, many of the other ones must be bad, too.
No, Bill did not leave the e-pawn hanging.
12.Nxc6 Qh4 13.O-O Rxf2
Black decides to go out in a blaze of glory.
14.Nxe4 Rxg2+ 15.Kxg2 Bh3+ 16.Kh1 Qg4
Threatening checkmate!
17.Qf7 checkmate
I have always found the Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit to be one of the more difficult variations in the Jerome. This is probably due to the additional development which, among other things, restricts my Queen from making wild advances.
Even Bill Wall has experienced relative "difficulty", scoring only 91% in his games with the line. The following game is quite a rarity.
Wall, Bill - Guest343560
PlayChess.com, 2013
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+
5...Kxf7 6.Qe2
Also seen are 6.d4 and 6.Nxe5+.
6...d5
Other moves have allowed Bill to utilize his Queen on a different diagonal, e.g. 6...Rf8, which led to 7.Qc4+ Ke8 8.Qxc5 d6 9.Qc4 Qe7 10.d4 exd4 11.Nxd4 Nxe4 12.Nxc6 Qh4 13.O-O Rxf2 14.Nxe4 Rxg2+ 15.Kxg2 Bh3+ 16.Kh1 Qg4 17.Qf7 checkmate Wall,B - Roberts,C, Chess.com, 2010. See also Wall,B - Hamilton,E, FICS, 2011 (1-0, 22); Wall, Bill - NFNZ, FICS, 2011 (1-0, 15); and Wall,B - Guest1872464, PlayChess.com, 2014 (1-0, 30).
Or 6...d6 7.Qc4+ as in Wall,B - Guest1459913, PlayChess.com, 2013 (1-0, 38).
Or 6...h6 7.Qc4+ d5 8.Qxc5 as in Wall,B - DarkKnight, PlayChess.com, 2012 (1-0, 23),
7.exd5
Better was 7.Nxd5, as in Wall, Bill - Samvazpr, Chess.com, 2010 (0-1, 25)
7...Nd4
This is an improvement over 7...Nxd5 8.Qc4 Nce7 9.Nxe5+ Ke6 10.Qxc5 Kxe5 11.Nxd5 Nxd5 12.c4 b6 13.d4+ Ke4 14.Qc6 Be6 15.Qxe6+ Kxd4 16.cxd5 Qxd5 17.Be3+ Kc4 18.Rc1+ Kb5 19.Qxd5+ c5 20.O-O Rhd8 21.Qc4+ Kc6 22.b4 Kb7 23.Qd5+ Ka6 24.Qc6 Rac8 25.Qa4+ Kb7 26.Rfd1 Rxd1+ 27.Rxd1 cxb4 28.Qxb4 Rc7 29.Qb5 h6 30.Rd7 Rxd7 31.Qxd7+ Ka6 32.Bd2 g5 33.a4 g4 34.Qb5+ Kb7 35.Bxh6 a6 36.Qd7+ Kb8 37.Bf4+ Ka8 38.Qc7 b5 39.Qb8 checkmate, papernoose - jsit, FICS, 2004.
8.Nxe5+ Kg8 9.Qc4 Qd6 10.O-O a6 11.Nd3 Ba7 12.Rb1 Bf5
Black is developing, while White struggles to get his pieces coordinated. An attack on White's King combined with an attack on his Queen brings the game to a quick conclusion.
13.a3 Ng4 14.g3 Nxh2 15.Kxh2 b5 White resigned
As a therapist in my "day job" I often have the opportunity to help my clients expand their understanding of consequences of behaviors by asking them to look further: "And then what...?"
In the following game Black does a good job of defusing the primar threat behind White's 6th move, but he then becomes lax at just about the time he should have asked himself "And then what...?"
Wall,B - Guest1459913
Playchess.com, 2013
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+
5...Kxf7 6.Qe2
A quiet move that you can find in a number of Bill's Jerome Gambit games.
6...d6
Dodging the misfortunes of 6...h6 7.Qc4+ in Wall,B - DarkKnight, Cocoa Beach, FL 2012 (1-0, 23); 6...Rf8 7.Qc4+ in Wall,B - Roberts,C, Chess.com, 2010 (1-0, 17), Wall,B - Hamilton,E, FICS, 2011 (1-0, 22) and Wall,B - NFNZ, FICS, 2011 (1-0, 15).
An alternate was 6...d5 as in the rare Wall,B - Samvazpr, Chess.com, 2010 (0-1, 25)
7.Qc4+ Be6?
You can almost read Black's mind: I took care of that move with 6...d6. Now I strike back by attacking the Queen with my Bishop!
8.Ng5+
Oh, well, yes, there is that...
8...Kg6 9.Nxe6 Qd7
10.f4
Threatening 11.f5+ Kf7 12.Nxc5+, winning the Queen.
10...h6 11.fxe5 Nxe5 12.Nxc5 Nxc4 13.Nxd7 Nxd7 14.d3 Nce5 15.0-0 c6
Players like myself (and perhaps Guest1459913) are often relieved, if not downright hopeful, when we find ourselves facing a strong player like Bill, being "only" a pawn down - with Queens off of the board, to boot.
This is usually an error in thinking: strong players can wield that extra pawn the way ordinary players wield an extra piece.
16.h4 Rhf8 17.Bd2 Kh5 18.Ne2 Kxh4 19.Nd4 g5 20.Nf5+ Kh5 21.Nxd6 b6
In case anyone is paying attention, White now has a protected passed pawn.
22.d4 Ng4 23.Nf5 Kg6? 24.Ne7+ Kh5
25.Nxc6
This wins another pawn, although Bill points out that 25.Rf3! was stronger.
25...Ndf6 26.Bb4 Rfc8 27.Ne7 Rxc2? 28.Rf3
Threatening 29.Rh3 mate
28...Ne3 29.Rxe3 Rxb2 30.Rh3+ Kg4 31.Rf1 Nxe4 32.Nd5 Re2 33.Ne3+ Rxe3 34.Rxe3 Ng3 35.Rff3 Nh5 36.Bd6 Rd8 37.Re4+ Nf4 38.Bxf4 Black resigned
This past week was a good one for receiving Jerome Gambit games in the email. First Argentina, then the United Kingdom, and now from the United States, thanks to Bill Wall.
Rick,
Here is my latest game, a Four Knights Jerome Gambit, played at 15
minutes per game. He got his queen and king pinned on move 23. He gave up
another pawn after 12...Rf8, trying to makle a discovered attack on my queen.
After 18...Rf5, I had to watch out for Rg5. After 20.Rae1, he can't play
20...Qxa2 due to Qxg7 mate.
Bill
Wall,B - DarkKnight
15 0, Playchess.com 2012
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+
5...Kxf7 6.Qe2
A line Bill has had success with.
6...h6
Likewise 6...Rf8 7.Qc4+ as in Wall,B - Roberts,C, Chess.com, 2010 (1-0, 17); Wall,B - Hamilton,E, FICS, 2011 (1-0, 22); and Wall,B - NFNZ, FICS, 2011 (1-0,15).
More in sync with the position is 6...d5 as in Wall,B - Samvazpr, Chess.com, 2010 (0-1, 25).
7.Qc4+ d5 8.Qxc5 dxe4 9.Nxe5+ Nxe5 10.Qxe5 Re8 11.Qf4 Kg8
12.0-0 Rf8 13.Nxe4 Bd7 14.d3 Bc6
15.Nxf6+ Rxf6 16.Qg3 Qd7 17.Bd2 Raf8 18.Bc3 Rf5
19.h4 Qf7 20.Rae1 g5 21.h5 Kh7 22.Bb4 Rg8 23.Re7 Black resigned
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.
N. Earl Roberts, whose comments on playability and refutation of a disreputable opening were reflected in the post "The Proper Perspective" is the first visitor to this blog to receive the third PGN file of games presented at jeromegambit.blogspot.com.This file (plus the first and second ones of course) is available for the asking, although if you wanted to send along a Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) of your own along with your request, that would be really nice, too.Or you could procrastinate until the next file is assembled – say, when 1,000 games have been posted (or referred to) here; we're already 3/4 of the way there!
Recently Ty Kroll made a post at the Yahoo "Unorthodox Chess Openings" Group that caught my eye and which I think is well worth sharing.
He was writing in reference to "the Fishing Pole" (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Ng4!?), a Ruy Lopez defense variant that has been enthusiastically embraced by National Master Brian Wall.
The Fishing Pole has its critics, and, like the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) also has its refutations (although the 'Pole is not nearly as bad as the Jerome). Under the right circumstances, both can also be a lot of fun to play.
It was equally interesting to see a response by N. Earl Roberts.
First Ty,
I think there's a lot of fun, if nothing else, to be had in unorthodox lines which are actually bad.
I've been playing the line Brian dubbed "Tyler Hughes" in the 2 knights since he brought my attention back to it from this forum, in Blitz, and it's a lot of fun, but only because the opponents almost never respond with the winning variation for white, because they've never analyzed the line before and have probably never even seen it. I can even imagine such tricks working under slower time controls. It's the surprise factor.
I mostly play lines like that for the fun value, though. If I ever write anything about that variation (and I doubt it hasn't "all been written" already) it would start with the refutation because that's the best line, the correct line; that's real theory. All the fun I have with it in nearly every game would go in theoretical sidelines.
Writing any other way is a fantasy. I'd like to see all such lines addressed in that context. ... the fishing pole included if it is unsound.
I agree with Ty. Readers of this blog should be well aware of the many refutations of the Jerome Gambit. As more turn up, you'll see them here, too.
By the way, those with an interest in music, voice, and the occasional chess post might want to visit his blog at http://ne0romantic.livejournal.com/
Here I can follow up with Earl's post
As for the value of the "Fishing pole" itself, I actually agree with you that perhaps its value lies in its surprise, but I must point out that there is a vast difference between "playable" and "sound".
I am sure Mr. Wall does well believe that the "Fishing Pole" is playable because in those posts that I have seen, he clearly demonstrates that he is obviously the vastly stronger player....at blitz.
Here in lies the clear difference between the two, an opening is made "playable" by who it is used against relating to what medium it is used. Example, the original exclamation ridden game concerned. Mr. Wall clearly shows that over a ratings difference of around 300 points minimum (that's at a guess of the difference between 1700 and the master strength he clams to be) in a game of blitz, that the "Fishing pole" is quite playable.
The argument for it being sound on the other hand might well reduce with the rating difference coming closer together and game time being extending to a sensible length for proper consideration of moves.
Finally, refutations. Refutations are only relevant when people know them. I think Mr. Wall knows this and probably why he continues to play the "Fishing Pole" with such success in the bubblegum medium of internet chess blitz and good on him to, I am happy for him.
One of the curse of the internet Ty is people will always have an opinion and when it comes to refutations, people will always be there to line up with even more opinions... and in some way, that's not all together a bad thing.
Thank you, gentlemen.
