Jerome Gambit: Wrinkles

A defender unfamiliar with the Jerome Gambit might search for some opening ideas from elsewhere, and try to apply them to the defense. That is a useful practice, and sometimes it works - but not in the following game.

Wall, Bill - Euphron
FICS, 2019

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.d4 Bd6 

I sometimes wonder when Black plays this move, if he is remembering the Fork Trick, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bc4 Nxe4 5.Nxe4 d5 6.Bd3 dxe4 7.Bxe4.

Still, there is a problem applying the logic of that opening line to the Jerome Gambit. The straight-forward 6...Bxd4 was simpler and stronger.

7.dxe5 Bxe5

The piece was safer on e7 or even f8. That is one of the interesting Jerome Gambit wrinkles.

8.Qh5+ 

There are 64 games in The Database with this move. White scores a solid 67%. (Bill: 100%)

For comparison, there are 69 games with 8.Qd5+. White scores 76%. (Bill: 100%)

8...Kf8

Black's King backs away from the action. "Stronger" (it may not feel that way for someone new to the Jerome Gambit) was 8...Ke6, but White still got plenty of play in Wall,B - Nikelin, lichess.org, 2017, (1-0, 14) 

Also dealt with harshly was 8...g6, e.g. 9.Qxe5 Nf6 10.Bg5 Re8 11.Qf4 b6 12.e5 Black resigned, Wall,B - NN, lichess.org, 2016. 

9.Qxe5 d6 10.Qf4+Qf6 11.Nc3 

White is a pawn up, and doesn't mind exchanging Queens. If Black initiates the swap, the recapture will help White's development. The first player certainly has no need to enter complications.

11...c6

This keeps White's Knight out of d6, but weakens the d6 pawn, and this will have an effect on the rest of the play in the game.

12.O-O Bd7 13.Qg3 Nh6 14.Bf4 Nf7 15.h4 

White's h-pawn plays more in the coming action than Black's h-Rook.

15...Re8 16.Rad1 Ne5 17.Bg5 Qe6 18.f4 Nf7 

19.f5 Qe5 20.Bf4 Qc5+ 21.Kh1 Bc8 

Making room for the Rook to slide over to d8 and protect the pawn on d6. Too late.

22.f6 g6 23.Bxd6+ Nxd6 24.Rxd6 Black resigned

White is only 2 pawns up, but they are the mighty "Jerome pawns", and their advance will cause destruction.

Jerome Gambit: The Improved Fork Trick

Next to the "I have never seen this before!" reaction of some players defending against the Jerome Gambit, the "Oh, this looks familiar!" has to be an equally frequent response. There is always the risk, however, of moving too quickly and falling into an "improved" Fork Trick, as Bill Wall shows in the following game. 

Wall, Bill - Vicher
lichess.org, 2016

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

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.d4 Bd6

This position has a resemblance to that of the "fork trick", and that may be the reason Black opted to move the Bishop where he did. However, the placement of his King makes for a significant difference in the play White can develop.

7.dxe5 Bxe5

As planned, but transforming a roughly equal position to one definitely better for White. (Omigosh! How did that happen?? Black had a won position after 5 moves!)

8.Qd5+ Kf6

Yes, Bill has been here before: 8...Kf8 9.Qxe5 d6 (9...Qe7 10.Qf4+ Nf6 11.Nc3 d6 12.O-O Qe5 13.Qxe5 dxe5 14.f4 exf4 15.Bxf4 Ne8 16.Bd6+ Kg8 17.Rf8 checkmate, Wall,B - Guest539122, PlayChess.com, 2015) 10.Qd4 (10.Qb5 Nf6 11.Nc3 c6 12.Qd3 Be6 13.Bg5 h6 14.Bh4 g5 15.Bg3 Ke7 16.O-O-O Ne8 17.f4 g4 18.Bh4+ Nf6 19.e5 dxe5 20.Qg6 Qf8 21.fxe5 Black resigned, Wall,B - NN, lichess.org, 2016) 10...Nf6 11.O-O c5 12.Qd3 Bd7 13.Bf4 a6 14.Bxd6+ Kf7 15.e5 Bb5 16.c4 Black resigned, Wall,B - Guest5856753, PlayChess.com, 2016.

9.f4 Qe7

Or 9...c6 10.Qxe5+ Kf7 11.O-O Qe7 12.Nc3 d6 13.Qh5+ g6 14.Qe2 Nf6 15.e5 Nd5 16.Nxd5 cxd5 17.Qb5 dxe5 18.fxe5+ Kg7 19.Qxd5 Re8 20.c3 Qxe5 21.Qf7+ Kh8 22.Bg5 Qxg5 23.Qxe8+
Kg7 24.Qf8 checkmate, Wall,B - Neilson,C, Melbourne, FL, 2016.

Or 9...Bd6 10.Qg5+ Kf7 11.Qxd8 Black resigned, Wall,B - NN, lichess.org, 2016.

10.fxe5+ Qxe5

11.Rf1+ Kg6 12.Qf7 checkmate

If You Can't Bash Them With the Jerome Gambit, Maybe You Can Bore Them to Tears

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...............

I don't always get to play the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+), no matter how hard I try. In its place, I sometimes explore the opening line suggested by chessfriend Yury Bukayev. The advantage that White gets is small - so small, in the following game, that I think it lulled my opponent to sleep...

(I suppose that I should be embarassed.)

perrypawnpusher - aquitanus
6 12 blitz, FICS, 2016

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 

The Two Knights Defense. That's okay. I always try for a transposition to the Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit after 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ or the Semi-Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit after 4.Nc3 a6 5.0-0 Bc5 6.Bxf7+.

4.Nc3 Nxe4 

Rats. Going for the "fork trick". For a brief introduction as it relates to the Jerome, see the post "Jerome Gambit vs Two Knights Defense (Part 3)". Follow that up with "Further Explorations" (Parts 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5).

5.Nxe4 d5 6.Bd3 dxe4 7.Bxe4 Bd6 8.Bxc6+ bxc6

9.O-O 

Instead, Bukayev recommends 9.d4 or 9.d3. Next time I will remember that.

9...Bg4 10.d3 Qf6 11.Re1 O-O-O 12.Re3

A good alternative was 12.Bg5.

12...Bc5 13.Re4 Rd4 14.Be3 Rxe4 15.dxe4 Rd8 16.Qe2 Qd6 17.Bxc5 Qxc5 18.Rd1 Rxd1+ 19.Qxd1 Qc4 

White has what my father used to call "a whole lot of nothing". Black's Bishop vs Knight and better placed Queen balances out his troubled Queenside pawns. Perhaps White's best try for a slight edge is now 20.Nxe5.

20.Qd3 Qxd3 21.cxd3 Bxf3 22.gxf3 Kd7

How does that old "Porgy and Bess" tune go? I've got plenty of nothing, and nothing's plenty for me...

I did have more time on my clock, though, and I figured that I was not risking much by continuing to play. (It is an embarassingly bland position for a Jerome Gambiteer - but not as embarassing as a losing one.)

23.Kf1 Kd6 24.Ke2 g5 25.Ke3 c5 26.Kd2 Kc6 27.Kc3 Kb5 28.Kb3 a5 29.a4+ Kc6 30.Kc4 h6 31.b3 h5 32.Kc3 Kd6 33.Kd2 c6 34.Kc3 Ke6 35.Kc4 Kd6 

Not much going on. Black has a possible slip - if he has become bored with me. (I have a later slip, if I get too excited.)

36.Kc3 Ke6 37.Kd2 Kf6 38.h3 Kg6

An unfortunate slip that tosses away the draw. Of course, 38...Ke6, heading back to the Queenside, was the move.

39.Kc3 Kf6 40.Kc4 h4 41.Kxc5 g4

Giving me a chance to blunder with the rote "capture toward the center" 42.hxg3? h4, giving Black the win.

42.fxg4  Black resigned

5% New (Part 1)

I am always looking for something new in the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ and friends) universe. Before I share any discoveries, though, I check to make sure that I haven't already passed the information along. With over 2,200 blog posts, I can't keep everything in my head. Here's a good example.

Let's start with a Jerome-ish line from the Two Knight's Defense (or the Italian Game, or the Four Knights Game):  1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+ . It, and similar positions, are discussed under the "fork trick" in Pawn Power in Chess, by Hans Kmoch (1949).

For a brief introduction as it relates to the Jerome, see the post "Jerome Gambit vs Two Knights Defense (Part 3)". Follow that up with "Further Explorations" (Parts 1, 2, 3,  4 & 5). 

A few years ago, Tim Sawyer, a Blackmar Diemer Gambit expert, on his blog, gave the line that we are looking at today the descriptive name the "Open Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit". He was influenced by a game where "jeromed" played the OIFKJG against him.

Tim mentioned that Bill Wall - no stranger to the Jerome Gambit - instead calls the line the "Noa Gambit".

I am guessing that Bill is referring to the following game (there are probably others) by the Hungarian Chess master:

Noa, Josef - Makovetz, Gyula
DSB-07.Kongress, Dresden, 1892
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+ Kxf7 6.Nxe4 d5 7.Ng3 e4 8.Ng1 h5 9.d4 h4 10.Nf1 Qf6 11.c3 Ne7 12.Ne3 Kg8 13.Ne2 c6 14.h3 g5 15.Rf1 Bh6 16.f3 exf3 17.Rxf3 Qg6 18.b3 Rh7 19.Ba3 g4 20.hxg4 Bxg4 21.Nxg4 Qxg4 22.Ng3 Rf7 23.Bxe7 Rxe7+ 24.Ne2 Qxg2 25.Rf2 Qg1+ 26.Rf1 Qg3+ 27.Rf2 Rf8 White resigned

I am happy to now add that Examples of Chess Master-Play (1894), by Charles Thomas Blanshard, says of 5.Bxf7+ "The text move, a hobby of Dr. Noa, develops Black's game." (I have not turned up any more examples, however.)

It turned out, however, that I was able to identify a precursor to Noa's play:

Zoltowski, E - Zukertort, Johannes
Berlin, 1869
1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+ Kxf7 6.Nxe4 Be7 7.Nfg5+ Bxg5 8.Qh5+ g6 9.Qxg5 d5 10.Qxd8 Rxd8 11.Ng5+ Kg7 12.d3 Nd4 13.O-O Nxc2 14.Rb1 Re8 15.b3 Bf5 16.Rd1 Nb4 17.Ba3 Nxd3 18.g4 Nxf2 19.Rxd5 Nxg4 20.Rbd1 Ne3 21.Rd7+ Bxd7 22.Rxd7+ Kh6 23.Nf7+ Kh5 24.Bc1 Nf5 25.Ng5 h6 26.Rh7 Rad8 White resigned

To date, I have not found any references to the "Zoltowski Gambit".

I also shared a game which was about as close as any sort of Jerome Gambit was going to get to a World Champion:

Fischer, Robert James - Ames, D.
USA, 1955
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bc4 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+ Kxf7 6.Nxe4 d5 7.Neg5+ Kg8 8.d4 h6 9.Nh3 Bg4 10.dxe5 Nxe5 11.Nf4 c6 12.h3 Nxf3+ 13.gxf3 Bf5 14.Be3 Bb4+ 15.c3 Ba5 16.Rg1 Qe8 17.Nxd5 Qf7 18.Nf4 Re8 19.Qb3 Bc7 20.Qxf7+ Kxf7 21.Nh5 g6 22.Ng3 Bxh3 23.O-O-O Rd8 24.Rxd8 Bxd8 25.Rh1 Bg2 26.Rxh6 Rxh6 27.Bxh6 Bxf3 28.Be3 drawn

Of course, Bobby wasn't even a teenager when he played that game.

So - what's new?

I recently discovered, in Pollock Memories: A Collection of Chess Games, Problems, &c., &c., Including His Matches with Eugene Delmar, Jackson Showalter, and G.H.D. Gossip (1899), by William Henry Krause Pollock, edited by F. F. Rowland, an undated/unplaced game between Pollock and an Amateur, with the introduction: "The following is a very fine example, known in Dublin years ago as the 'Monck Gambit' ." 

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+ Kxf7 6.Nxe4 d5 7.Nfg5+ Kg6 8.Qf3 dxe4 9.Qf7+ Kxg5

"White now mates in ten moves."

10.d4+ Kh4 11.h3 Bb4+ 12.Kf1 g6 13.g3+ Kh5 14.g4+ Kh4 15.Qb3 Bc3 16.Qxc3 e3 17.Qxe3 Bxg4 18.hxg4+ Kxg4 19.Qe4 checkmate

I will have more on the Monck Gambit next post. For now, it will suffice to recall Monck's comment about the Jerome Gambit from the Preston Guardian, April 26, 1882, concerning the game Lowe,E - Cudmore,D, correspondence, 1881

Every form of the Jerome Gambit is, I believe, unsound and this is no exception.

[to be continued]

This Is Your Last Chance

After the previous post on the Jerome Gambit Declined, here is a fun example (or three: also see my two games against walkinthespirit: #1 and #2).

HauntedKnight - bozidaranas
blitz, FICS, 2010

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.O-O Nf6 5.Bxf7+ Kf8 6.Bb3

Transposing to the main Declined line, 4.Bxf7+ Kf8 5.Bb3 Nf6 6.0-0. Black, given one, only, and his last chance to accept one or two pieces, shows that he wants no part of White's goofy attack - and strikes back

6...d5 7.exd5 Nxd5 8.Nxe5

White responds with the "fork trick".

8...Nxe5 9.d4 Be7 10.dxe5 Nb4

It is too late to quibble that 10...c6 was stronger.

11.Qf3+ Ke8 12.Qf7+ Kd7 13.Rd1+ Black resigned

In my post "On the Other Hand..." the other day, I mentioned Abby Marshall's "The Openings Explained" column at ChessCafe, where she recently took on "The Two Knights Defense, Center Fork Trick" (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nxe4 5.Nxe4 d5)

I also alluded to Yury V. Bukayev's analysis as well, which I sent to Abby.

Ms. Marshall had selected and added my email to the bottom of her column as "pertinent response."

Rick Kennedy from the USA – Abby, I never miss your column at ChessCafe, and love the hard work you put into each one. Here's an interesting Fork Trick resource. Please keep up the great work.

On the Other Hand...

When I wander over to the ChessCafe website, I like to read the monthly column by Abby Marshall (USCF Candidate Master, currently rated 2192) "The Openings Explained". She's a hard worker, she's not afraid of playing gambits (the King's Gambit is her specialty) – and she used to be from my home town.

This week's topic is "The Two Knights Defense, Center Fork Trick" [1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nxe4 5.Nxe4 d5], something that has been discussed on this blog a number of times before (like when you play 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 looking for a Jerome, and your opponent plays 3...Nf6; can your 4.Nc3 get him to cough up 4...Bc5, so you can play 5.Bxf7+ ?). For just a sample of posts, try "Jerome Gambit vs Two Knights Defense (Part 3)" and "Further Explorations (Part 1 and Part 2)"

Don't forget to review Yury V. Bukayev's analysis as well, which I will be sending to Abby.

Tournament Update: A Pleasant Surprise

As I noted yesterday, I have started my first 5 games in the Italian Opening tournament at Chess.com. Since 3 games have been with the Black pieces, there was no chance for a Jerome Gambit (at least by me, although I played 3...Bc5 each time, offering my opponents the opportunity) in those. In one game with the White pieces, my opponent opted for 3...Nf6 and against my try to transpose to the Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit with 4.Nc3 he elected to use the "fork trick" 4...Nxe4; while in the other I was met with the interesting 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bd6!?.


Still, this is a 25-player tournament, broken into 5 5-player groups, so that is a lot of Italian Opening play. I checked out the other games that have started, and was delighted to find one transpose into a Semi-Italian Jerome Gambit: perfectly reasonable, as the player of the White pieces has a rating 500+ points higher than his opponent. The gambiteer is up a Rook and three pawns now, and I will be pleased to present the game upon its conclusion.

Tournament Update

I have started my first 4 games in the Italian Opening tournament at Chess.com, mentioned earlier. Since 3 games were with the Black pieces, there was no chance for a Jerome Gambit (at least by me, although I played 3...Bc5 each time, offering my opponents the opportunity) there. In the one game with the White pieces, I tried for an Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit, but my opponent opted to use the "fork trick" (lucky for me I have Yury Bukayev's analysis to help me find my way, there). 


This reminds me of a story from the San Antonio tournament 40 years ago, as reported in Bent Larsen and David Levy's San Antonio, 1972 : Church's Fried Chicken, Inc. First International Chess Tournament. American master Ken Smith played his Smith–Morra Gambit (1.e4. c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3) against Grandmasters Larry Evans, Donald Byrne and Henrique Mecking, and lost each time. When Mario Campos Lopez faced Smith, though, he played the French Defence instead of the Sicilian, causing Larsen to comment in the tournament book "stronger is 1...c5 which wins a pawn."


I am going to have to start annotating 3...Nf6 in my games with "stronger is 3...Bc5, which wins two pieces"!


So far, I have won one game in the tournament, and in the rematch with my opponent I will have the White pieces, so I am hoping... (Oh, no, he just played 3...Nf6).

Trick Fork

On the way to reaching the Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit, Black can always stop off and play the "fork trick", which gives him, according to common belief, an even or slightly better game.* Is this an improvement over defending against the Jerome, though, where Black technically has a won game?


In the following game, my opponent gets tricked up in the fork trick...


perrypawnpusher - Tinde

blitz, FICS, 2012


1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nxe4

Played after some thought. Was he considering 4...Bc5 ?

5.Nxe4 d5 6.Bd3 dxe4 7.Bxe4 Bd7

The main line is 7... Bd6, after which it is helpful to be familiar with analysis by Yuri Bukayev. A few days later, I faced 7...Bc5.**

8.Bxc6

Better was the straight-forward 8.O-O Bd6 9. d4, but I had ideas along the e-file.

8... Bxc6 9.O-O 

Now White has nothing after 9... Bd6, but Black comes to that conclusion a move too soon and makes a mistake. Once a defender has played his defense, he sometimes stops defending...


9...Qe7 10.Nxe5 


Now Black's best is to acknowledge that he has troubles down the e-file, but still go out and meet them: 10...Qxe5 11.Re1 Be4 12.d4 (if 12.d3, then 12...O-O-O 13. Bd2 f5 14.dxe4 Bc5 give Black a lot of active play for the pawn, for example 15.c3 fxe4 16.Qg4+ Kb8 17.Be3, even) 12... Qd5 (or 12...Qe6 13.f3 O-O-O 14.fxe4 with an edge to White) 13.c4 Qe6 14.d5 Qe5 15.f3 f5 16.fxe4 Bc5+ 17.Kh1 O-O 18.exf5 Qxf5 and White is a bit better.


Instead, he marshalls on.


10...f6 11.Nxc6 bxc6 12.Re1 Black resigned.

This time there is no minor piece to intercede between the White Rook and the Black Queen.


*Those who have read Yuri Bukayev's article on the "fork trick" may find that White, actually, has an edge. 


**perrypawnpusher- adrienr, blitz, FICS, 2012: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nxe4 5.Nxe4 d5 6.Bd3 dxe4 7.Bxe4 Bc5 8.O-O O-O 9.Bxc6 bxc6 10.Nxe5 Qd5 11.Nf3 Bg4 12.d3 Rfe8 13.h3 Bh5 14.Bf4 Re6 15.Bxc7 Rg6 16.Kh2 Re8 17.Bg3 f5 18.Re1 Rf8 19.c4 Qf7 20.d4 f4 21.dxc5 fxg3+ 22.fxg3 Bxf3 23.gxf3 Qxf3 24.Qxf3 Rxf3 25.Rg1 Rf2+ 26.Rg2 Rgf6 27.Kg1 Rxg2+ 28.Kxg2 Kf7 29.Rf1 Rxf1 30.Kxf1 Ke6 31.Ke2 Kf5 32.Kf3 h6 33.b4 Ke5 34.Ke3 Black resigned [I know it's a footnote game, but it was pretty well-played -- Rick]