Jerome Gambit: A Way Out of the Woods (Part 2)

[continued from previous post]

My second Jerome Gambit, in the second round of the "Italian Game Classic" tournament at Chess.com, was a battle. I flailed around for a while, trying to put together a decent plan. In the end, it was the pawns.

perrypawnpusher - FedeMamut
Italian Game Classic, Chess.com 2019

12.Bg5 

This move is often thematic in the Jerome Gambit. However, when the game was over and I submitted it for Chess.com's computer analysis, the verdict was that while 12.Bg5 was "good", 12.h4 was "best". However, in the same position, I would choose my move, again, instead of weakening my Kingside.

12...Qe5 

Unpinning the Knight, moving the Queen to a more active post - and offering to exchange Queens. With Black's dark squared Bishop still holding back my f-pawn, I wasn't sure what my best way forward would be - but it certainly wasn't exchanging Queens. 

13.Bf4 Qd4 14.Be3 Qb4 15.Bxc5 Qxc5 

Never mind what the Chess.com computer said about the past few moves (I am sure that you can guess) - I have gotten rid of the pinning Bishop, and Black's Queen will have to stay on the a7-g1 diagonal to keep my f-pawn at home.

16.Rae1 h4 17.Qf4 Qe5 18.Qd2 Be6

19.f4 

Ta dah!

"Good", but 19.h3 was "best". Maybe so, but how does White follow up? The Chess.com computer's move would have led me further into the wilderness.

19...Qd4+ 20.Kh1 h3 21.g3 a5 

This move reminded me, fondly, of the Fidelity Chess Challenger 7, a dedicated chess computer (running on the 8-bit Z80 cpu) which came out in 1979. Whenever it assessed its position as good, but didn't have a way forward, it would often launch one of it's Rook pawns.

I was skeptical of my opponent's move when he played it, as it seemed like it gave me a free tempo, but the Chess.com computer later labelled it as "good". I figured that it was time to strike in the middle, and, of course, played another "inaccuracy".

22.e5 

The computer preferred 22.Ne2. That is an interesting move, and Stockfish 10 (at 35 ply), afterwards, could barely differentiate it from 22.Nd1 and 22.f5 (they were within 4/100th of a pawn of each other!). That last move held the possibility of White following up with Rf1-f4, and then g4 and a later g5, so I should have given it consideration.

22...Nd5

Okay, this is a "blunder", but it is helpful to understand why.

When White's pawn advances in the Jerome Gambit, the question for Black is often "to exchange or not?" Black decided not to, in our game, but he overlooked the better 22...Bd5+, probably because the piece can be snapped off right away with 23.Nxd5. After 23...Qxd5+ 24.Kg1 Qd4+ 25.Kh1 Qd5+, etc, Black would have a draw - but why would he want it? Instead, 25...Nd7 would keep Black's advantage, as after 26.e6, the pawn could easily be blockaded.

Black's move gave me a tempo, and I spent it on the "Jerome pawns". 

23.f5 Bg8 

24.e6

I could not figure out how to make 24.f6 work, and, therefore, settled for blocking in Black's light square Bishop - which often gets blocked in (or neglected) on the Queenside. The g-pawn looked like it had a future in a supporting role.

Black's next few moves show that he wasn't sure how to continue, either.

24...Nxc3 25.bxc3 Qf6 26. g4 Qh6 

It is true that 27.Qxh6 now would turn the advantage back over to Black, but I was not interested in anything so peaceful. Besides, there was another tempo to find for my "Jerome pawns".

27.g5 Qh5 28.Qf4 

Certainly, 28.f6 also would work here, but the text targeted Black's pawn at d6, giving White's Queen entrance behind enemy lines. The f-pawn would have its day.

28...Qe8 29.f6 g6 30.Qxd6+ Black resigned

(I just noticed that I still had all 8 of my pawns.)

Jerome Gambit: A Way Out of the Woods (Part 1)

My second win with the Jerome Gambit, in the second round of the "Italian Game Classic" tournament at Chess.com, was a scary one. My opponent played aggressively and had some very interesting ideas. At one point, I decided to trust the "Jerome pawns" and threw them forward - backed up by my Rooks. It wasn't the "best" play, but it was enough to shake my opponent and give me a way out of the woods. I gathered in the full point.

The game is fun to play over, but do not overlook the notes - especially if you plan on playing (or defending against) the Jerome Gambit.

perrypawnpusher - FedeMamut
Italian Game Classic, Chess.com 2019

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

After the game was over, I ran it through the computer at Chess.com. I was delighted to see that it marked "4.Bxf7+" as a "book" move. I decided to rely on the analysis for my notes here.

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ 

The Chess.com computer commented that this move is "excellent", although 6.d4 is "best".

For the record, The Database has 4,442 games with 6.Qh5+ (White scores 56%) and 2,024 games with 6.d4 (White scores 55%). So, 6.Qh5+ is twice as popular as 6.d4, but both moves score similarly.

6...Kf8 

The Jerome Defense to the Jerome Gambit, played successfully by Alonzo Wheeler Jerome in two correspondence games against Daniel Jaeger in 1880.

Again, the computer commented that this move is "excellent", although 6...Ke6 is "best".

The Database has 665 games with 6...Kf8, with White scoring 50%, while it has 1,102 games with 6...Ke6, with White scoring 53%. Black has chosen "the road less followed", but one that has been better for the defenders.

7.Qxe5 d6 

Once more, the computer opined that while 7...d6 was "excellent", 7...d5 was "best". I was beginning to think that when it came to the end of the game, it would suggest that FedeMamut came in "second place", while I came in "next to last".

Still, The Database has 412 games with 7...d6, with White scoring 48%. Of note, there are only 2 games with 7...d5, and Black won both of them.

8.Qg3 Qe7 

The computer said this move was an "inaccuracy", while 8...Nf6 was "best". Still, it rated Black as clearly better.

The Database has only 8 games with 8...Qe7, with White scoring 63%.

9.Nc3

Likewise, an "inaccuracy", while 9.d3 would be "best". At this point, I decided to get Stockfish 10's opinion. It agreed with the Chess.com computer. Figures.

For the record, I played 9.d3 in perrypawnpusher - frencheng, 10 5 blitz, FICS, 2010 (1-0, 19)

9...Nf6

Interestingly enough, the Chess.com computer rated this move as "good", but preferred the novelty, 9...h5, as "best". Keep that in mind.

10.d3 c6 11.O-O h5 

The Chess.com computer rated this move as an "inaccuracy", preferring 11...Kf7 as "best". It was looking at Black's King safety, and was recommending that he castle-by-hand.

I like the aggressive pawn move - it threatens White's King's safety, makes active use of Black's Rook, and still leaves Black better. Moreover, in future move suggestions, the computer suggested the weakening h2-h4 for White, an additional benefit of Black's "inaccuracy".

[to be continued]

Jerome Gambit: History in Play

My first win with the Jerome Gambit, in the second round of the "Italian Game Classic" tournament at Chess.com, was a bit of a journey through the opening's history.

An unfortunate slip by my opponent allowed me a tactical shot that brought the game to an early conclusion.

perrypawnpusher - PDX84
Italian Game Classic, Chess.com, 2019

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 

Black courageously thinks of holding onto both sacrificed pieces. The compter chess analysis at Chess.com, after the game, identified the move as "best".

7.Qf5+

Alonzo Wheeler Jerome first suggested this move in the April 4, 1874 issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal. He also played 7.f4 and 7.O-O in correspondence games against S.A. Charles, and suggested 7.b4 "for analysis"; this was covered in the October, 1881 issue of Brentano's Chess Monthly.

A check of The Database shows 507 games with 7.Qf5+, with White scoring 48%, as opposed to 517 games with 7.f4, with White scoring 61%. There are no games with 7.b4.

7...Kd6 8.f4 Qf6 9.fxe5+ Qxe5 10.Qf3 

Not 10.Qxe5+ this time. That move has given me mixed results, and a loss most recently: perrypawnpusher - djdave28, Italian Game Tournament, Chess.com, 2014, (1-0, 22); perrypawnpusher - djdave28, Italian Game Tournament, Chess.com 2015, (1-0, 32); and perrypawnpusher - Altotemmi, Giuoco Piano Tournament, Chess.com, 2016, (0-1, 51). 

The Queen exchange is at least as old as Jerome, A - Jaeger, D, correspondence, 1878 (0-1, 68).

10...Nf6 

This move makes a lot of sense.

Jerome faced 10...Ne7 in a correspondence game against Jaeger in 1878 (0-1, 68).

 Lowe,E - Cudmore,D, correspondence, 1881, continued 10...b5 (½-½, 48).

Keeble,J - Cubitt,J, Norwich 1886, continued 10...c6 (1-0, 17).

11.d3 Ke7 

Black dodges the crudest of threats - 12.Bf4, pinning his Queen to his King. The idea is at least as old as Vazquez - Giraudy, Mexico, 1876 (remove White's Queen Rook) 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.d4 Bxd4 9.c3 Bb6 10.f4 Qf6 11.fxe5+ Qxe5 12.Bf4 Qxf4 13.Qxf4+ Ke7 14.Rf1 Nh6 15.Qe5+ Kd8 16.Qxg7 Re8 17.Qg5+ Re7 18.Rf8 checkmate. Still, I've scored points from this "Optical Illusion" variation of the Jerome Gambit - see "Optical Illusion (1)", "Optical Illusion (2)" and "Disdainful Defender Defense".

Instead, 11...Kc6 was seen in Jerome, A - Colburn, correspondence 1879 (0-1, 34) and Jerome, A - Charles, S.A., correspondence, 1881 (unfinished).

12.Nc3 Bb4 

Pinning the White Knight to keep it off of d5.

Instead:

12...g5 was seen in Jerome, A - Shinkman, W, Iowa, 1874 (0-1, 21);

12...d6 was seen in Jerome, A - Brownson, O, Iowa, 1875 (1-0, 43);

12...c6 was seen in Jerome, A - Amateur, off hand game, 1876 (1-0, 20); and

12...d5 was seen in Jerome, A - Pane, M, correspondence, 1878 (1-0, 41).

13.Bd2

I was amused to see that I had played 13.O-O here, years ago, in perrypawnpusher - PREMK, blitz, FICS, 2005. The idea was that 13...Bxc3 14.bxc3 Qxc3 15.Qg3!? would give White good play for the sacrificed pawn.

13...Rf8 14.O-O d6 

Instead, in the post mortem, Komodo 10 recommended the brutal 14...Bd6, with the idea of forcing exchanges to eliminate White's attacking chances and highlight Black's piece-for-a-pawn advantage, e.g. 15.g3 c6 16.Bf4 Bc5+ 17.Kg2 Qh5 18.Na4 Qxf3+ 19.Rxf3 d6 20.Nxc5 dxc5 21.Raf1 Bg4 22.R3f2 Be6 

15.Nd5+ Black resigned

White will recover his sacrificed piece. He will be a pawn up, with better development and King safety. Black decided not to play on.

Jerome Gambit: Against the Titans (Part 2)

[continued from the previous post]

perrypawnpusher - Chess Titans

Casual Game, 2019

Black's move seems to be the most natural in the world, but, after the game, Stockfish 10 preferred 13...Kf7. Can you see why? The reason is covered in the next note.

14.Qg5+ Ke8 15.Qxd8+ 

I made this move quickly, seeing an opportunity to simplify things by getting the Queens off of the board, leading to a position where I would be a pawn up.

Had I looked closer - or been less anxious - I would have found the alternative, 15.Qxg7, which would scoop up another pawn, and leads, after 15...Qf6 16.Qxf6 Nxf6, to an exchange of Queens, anyhow.

Playing against computers makes me nervous. (Against human beings, too.)

15...Kxd8 16.Rxh2

16...Be6 

Instead, 16...Nf6 17. d3 Ng4 18. Rh4 Nf6 19. Be3 Bg4 20. Bd4 Bd1 21. Na3 Be2 22. Kf2 Bxd3 23. cxd3 c5 24.Bxf6+ gxf6 25. Nc4 Ke7 26. Ne3 Kf7 27. Rah1 Kg6 28. Rh6+ Kg7 29. Nf5+ Kg8 30.Rxf6 d5 31. Nh6+ Kg7 32. Rf7+ Kg6 33. e5 Rhg8 34. Rf6+ Kg7 35. Nf5+ Kh8 36.Rxh7+ Kxh7 37. Rh6 checkmate, was Born Loser - NN, 2005.

17.Nc3 g6 18.d4 h5 

The rest of the game, starting with this move, has a bit of an odd tinge to it. Some of Black's moves are hard to fathom. Readers may also be frustrated by my sudden intense caution.

19.d5 Bf7 20.e5 dxe5 21.fxe5 

The central "Jerome pawns" give White a winning advantage.

21...c6 22.d6 

It was better to advance the other center pawn.

22...Bd5+ 23.Nxd5 cxd5 24.Be3 

Safe development, but 24.e6 was stronger.

24...Kc8 25.Rd1 a5 26.Rxd5 Nh6 27.Bxh6 Rxh6 28.Kf3 a4 29.Re2 h4 30.gxh4 Rxh4 

31.e6 Rh3+  32.Kg4 Rh4+ 

Black throws away the Rook, in order to push even a more dire position from appearing on its analysis "horizon". I have seen examples of computers tossing piece after piece, just to make an even-more-unfavorable future position "disappear", only to have it "reappear" after the opponent makes a capture. In the end, more material is lost than in the "dreaded" situation it is trying to avoid. (The similarity to human clinical depression is notable.)  

33.Kxh4 a3 34.d7+ Kc7 35.e7 Rh8+ 36.Kg4 Rh4+ 

See the previous note.

37.Kxh4 g5+ 38.Kxg5 b6 39.d8=Q+ Kb7 40.e8=Q axb2 41.Re7+ Ka6 42.Qa4 checkmate 

Jerome Gambit: "Too Good" (Part 2)

[continued from previous post]

perrypawnpusher - Jackcchow
Chess.com, 2019

14.Nc3

This very reasonable move appears to be a novelty, according to The Database.

14...Qe7 15.Qd3 Re8

Clearly, White wants to play e4-e5, while Black would like to prevent that. The post mortem "discussion" was interesting. Chess.com analysis saw Black's move as an "inaccuracy", labeling 15...Nb4 as "best". Stockfish 10, however, evaluated both 15...Re8 and 15...Nb4 as completely equal to each other.

16.Bg5 

Standard Jerome Gambit development.

16...Qf7 17.Rae1 

More of the same.

17...Nb4 18.Qd2

How many times in the Jerome Gambit has Black played ...Nb4, threatening the White Queen? More than a few. I was happy to see the move, as I mis-evaluated it as a waste of time. I was shocked, afterwards, to see that the Chess.com analysis saw it as "best".

 18...Nxa2

What do you think?

The Chess.com analysis called this move an "inaccuracy", preferring 18...h6. Stockfish 10 preferred 18...h6, but, after 19.Bf4, evaluated 19...Nxa2 the same as 19...Kg8, both leading to an equal game. Complicated.

During the game, I hadn't even considered the Knight move, focusing on 18...h6 19.Bh4 Qh5 20.Qf2 Ng4, which seems kind of irrelevant as I now look at it. I think that is enough proof that I was losing the thread of the game.

19.e5 

This move is okay, but, of course, 19.Nxa2 was best.

I think my mistake confused my opponent. After all, I was supposed to know what I was doing. Of course, he was welcome to borrow as much confusion as possible.

19...h6 

This is not correct. The consistent 19...Nxc3 was the way to keep White's edge small.  

20.Bh4 

From a distance, this move doesn't make much sense, especially since Black's Queen has moved out of the pin on the Knight.

The proper move was, of course, 20.e6, attacking the Bishop and the Queen, while cutting off the support of the Knight. My attacked Bishop on g5 was irrelevant.

The Chess.com analysis clearly marked my move as "a missed win". 

20...Nxc3 21.Qxc3 dxe5 

In a chaotic position, it was my opponent's turn to err. Instead of this "normal" move, he had 21...Bb5, when 22.e6 would have lost much of its bite after 22...Qe7. After a bit of scrambling, White would only have a small edge, because of that blockaded advanced "Jerome pawn".

Now, the game plays out to my advantage.

22.dxe5 Nd5 23.Qc5+ Kg8 24.e6 Bxe6

Giving the piece back makes the most sense.

25.fxe6 Qh5 

At first glance, the position looks balanced (except for Black's unfortunate Rook) but White is due to win a piece, one way or another - at least, that's what Stockfish 10 suggested afterward. I just wanted to get my Bishop to safety.

26.Bg3 b6 27.Qc6 Re7 28.Re5 Black resigned

Okay, now Black will lose a piece.

Pretty scrappy play by Jackcchow.

Me? Lost in the woods, or at least the tree of variations. Luckily, I had company.

Jerome Gambit: "Too Good" (Part 1)

I have spent a lot of time uncovering refutations of the Jerome Gambit, and sometimes I get the incredibly foolish notion that I am "too good" for the opening. It only takes a game like the following one to readjust my perspective: too often, the Jerome Gambit is "too good" for me. (But, still, I persist).

Yes, Jackcchow, at Chess.com, worked hard to put me back in my place. Pretty impressive, given it was only the second time he had faced the Jerome Gambit.

After the game, I asked my old "friends" The Database (60,700 Jerome Gambit and Jerome-related games, representative of online club play) and Stockfish 10 to help make sense of it all. I also referred to Chess.com's post-game analysis, which made some interesting points.

perrypawnpusher - Jackcchow
Chess.com, 2019

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 

I am usually happy to see this move, not so much because it is "bad" (it isn't) but because the game that White gets is comfortable. According to The Database, I have reached this position 132 times, scoring 80%.

After the game was over, I asked the Chess.com website for a report on the game, and was surprised when it awarded the move a "?!" and the label "inaccuracy" (preferring 6...Ke6, and the annoying or silicon defense, 7.f4 d6 8.fxe5 dxe5, a line that computers often love). That seemed a bit harsh to me.

7.Qd5+

I call this move "the nudge", and it is at least as old as Jerome - Brownson, Iowa, 1875 (1-0, 28). In blitz games, it can give Black pause, as he spends precious seconds wondering What is this move all about?

Is the move worth playing? That is a good question. On one hand, it chases Black's King to the 8th rank, where it can be further exposed to attack, and where it might impede the development of his Rook. Also, if Black chooses to castle-by-hand, he will later need to spend a move on ...Kf7. Still, White has spent 2 moves to capture the Bishop, so it balances out: 7.Qd5+ Kf8/e8 8.Qxc5 Kf7 would lead to the same position as the direct 7.Qxc5.

Examining The Database is enlightening, however. There are 711 games with "the nudge", with White scoring 68%. On the other hand, there are 1,285 games with 7.Qxc5, and White scores only  46%. Make of that what you will. YMMV. (I suspect that one factor may be that those who know about playing "the nudge" know more about the main line play of the Jerome Gambit, in general.)

I chuckled at the Chess.com post-game assessment, seeing 7.Qd5+ as the "best" move.

7...Kf8

In response to "the nudge," Black's King usually goes to f8 or e8. Which square is better? Stockfish 10 assesses them as nearly identical, varying in mere hundreths of a pawn. The Database has 213 examples of 7...Kf8, with White scoring 65%; it has 467 examples of 7...Ke8, with White scoring 68%.

8.Qxc5+ d6 9.Qe3 Nf6 

Black has a piece for two pawns, with a somewhat exposed King.

White, the gambiteer, is behind in development.

By the way, Chess.com's assessment is that 9...Nf6 is "good," but 9...d5 is "best". The Database has no examples of the latter move.

10.O-O Be6 

I can't let pass Chess.com's assessment of this move as an "inaccuracy". The Database has 6 games with the move, but White scores a rather ordinary 3 - 2 - 1. The knock on 10...Be6 is that it gives some boost to White's next move, with a threatened pawn fork. Curiously, until now, The Database had only 2 games with 11.f4 - a draw and a loss for White! 

11.f4 Bd7 12.f5 Ne5 13.d4 Nc6 

At this point, after the game the Chess.com analysis saw the position as equal, while Stockfish 10 gave White a slight edge. White's 2 "Jerome pawns" give him sufficient compensation for the sacrificed piece - but the position is going to get more complicated. 

[to be continued]