Jerome Gambit: Win, How? (Part 1)

I just won my latest Jerome Gambit game, in the "Italian Game Classic" tournament at Chess.com. I am still trying to figure out how I did it.

Since my opponent and I entered what I call the "Optical Illusion" variation of the Jerome Gambit - see "Optical Illusion (1)", "Optical Illusion (2)" and "Disdainful Defender Defense" - I am inclined to see my last move in the game as giving a false impression of strength, another illusion.

This was a fortunate outcome for me, to a game that started off with ominous tones. Ever since I started posting on this blog, over a decade ago, I have worried (mostly, needlessly) that an opponent might simply come here and look up a line of play or refutation and throw it at me.

The fact is, you could get a good sense of my game by simply looking at my post on perrypawnpusher - PDX84, Italian Game Classic, Chess.com, 2019 (1-0, 15), and its notes, through move 12, as recounted less than 2 weeks ago in "Jerome Gambit: History in Play".

Really. Go read the post. It contains some good analysis and a good amount of Jerome Gambit history.

(For that matter, you could wander on back 6 years to "Who's the 'Expert'?", which contained perrypawnpusher - vz721, Italian Game thematic, Chess.com, 2013 (0-1, 29), which anticipated the current game through move 13. We will get back to that.)

Still, I don't want to give a bare game score, today. Since I had so much fun sharing the analysis of an earlier game that the Chess.com computer provided (see "Jerome Gambit: A Way Out of the Woods [Part 1 and 2]) I decided to consult that oracle again, and share its conclusions. I dipped into The Database a bit, too.

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

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ 

 The Chess.com computer post-game analysis rated this move as "excellent", but still considered 6.d4 to be "best".

As I wrote in "Jerome Gambit: A Way Out of the Woods (Part 1)",

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...Ke6

"Best" according to the Chess.com analyst.

7.Qf5+

This move was "good", while 7.f4  was "best".

The Database shows my clear preference for 7.Qf5+: I have 80 games with the move, scoring 86%. As for 7.f4, I have 2 games - although I did win both of them (see "Jerome Gambit: Unfinished Symphony Part 1 and 2" and "Return of the Negative Halo Effect in the Jerome Gambit").

7...Kd6 8.f4 

"best" according to the computer. It was first suggested in Jerome's analysis in the "New Chess Opening" article in the April 1874 issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal.

8...Qf6 

This was an "inaccuracy" according to the Chess.com post game analysis. Instead, 8...Kc6 was seen as "best".

This evaluation is mildly supported by The Database, that has 75 games with the natural move 8...Qf6, with White scoring 53%; while it has only 3 games with 8...Kc6, although Black won them all.

(It is interesting that this main line shows up in "Jerome Gambit Secrets #5", which takes a look at the relatively unknown 8...Ne7:  1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 Ne7 - although the "secret" comes a couple of moves later).

9.fxe5+

The computer analysis saw this move as "excellent", although it considered exchanging Queens with 9.Qxe5+,  as "best".

9...Qxe5 10.Qf3 

Of course, the Chess.com engine considered this move as an "inaccuracy", because swapping Queens with 10.Qxe5 would have been "best"

10...Nf6 

I my notes to perrypawnpusher - PDX84, I said that this move made a lot of sense. The Chess.com analysis referred to it as "best"

[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: 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: 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: What Am I Doing Here?

The following game is a good example of choosing to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

My opponent played well, but he had some help. From me.

perrypawnpusher - Guluphatep

"Italian Game", Chess.com, 2024

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

5...Kxf7 

I was pretty sure that I had reached this position before.

Checking The Database, I discovered that I had scored 8 - 2 - 2 -- as Black. Uh oh.

I was 1 - 1 as White. 

6.Nxe5+ 

I have faced a number of different lines:

6.Nc3 as in leobrazer - perrypawnpusher, blitz, FICS, 2009 (0-1, 48); 

6.d3 as in ecimsa - perrypawnpusher, blitz, FICS, 2009 (0-1, 32) ; xulian - perrypawnpusher, Jerome Classic #1, Chess.com, 2024.  (0-1, 19); cool64chess-perrypawnpusher, Chess.com, 2024 (0-1, 8); cool64chess - perrypawnpusher, Jerome Gambit Classic #1, Chess.com, 2024 (1/2-1/2, 31); sinipete - perrypawnpusher, Jerome Gambit Classic #1, Chess.com 2024 (1/2-1/2, 104); drewbear - perrypawnpusher, Jerome Gambit 3 thematic ChessWorld.net 2008 (0-1, 22); Capt.Mandrake - perrypawnpusher, JG3 thematic, Chessworld.net, 2008 (0-1, 8); 

Or 6.c3 as in Philidor1792 - perrypawnpusher, internet, 2015 (1-0, 36); 

Or 6.Ng5+ as in 123456789qeeed - perrypawnpusher, Chess.com, 2024 (0-1, 19); 

Or 6.d4 as in yoyokskr - perrypawnpusher, Chess.com, 2024 (0-1, 27);

Or 6.Re1 as in Hvakkimaruru - perrypawnpusher, Jerome Gambit Classic #1, Chess.com, 2024 (0-1, 28). 

6...Nxe5 7.d4 

I am not sure what I am doing playing this line. A peek at The Database shows that White scores 1 - 12 - 1 against 7...d5. Fortunately my opponent was not aware of this.

7...Bxd4 

7...Bd6 was seen in perrypawnpusher - Freddy1201, Play The Italian Game III, Chess.com 2023 (0-1, 23)

7...Nc6 was seen in perrypawnpusher - vityas81, Chess.com, 2023 (1-0, 16).

8.Qxd4 d6 9.f4 Nc6 

10.Qd3 Re8 11.Nc3 Kg8 

Black's King plans to step off of the a2-g8 digonal, where he can be checked.

12.Be3 Kh8 

13.a3 

To keep Black's Knight from coming to b4, but it costs an important tempo.

13...Nxe4 

Well played. Now, if 14.Nxe4 then 14...Bf5.

14.Rae1 Nxc3 15.Qxc3 Bf5 

It is hard to find compensation for White's sacrificed material.

16.h3 Qf6 17.Qb3 b6 18.c3 Na5 19.Qd1 Nc4 

20.Bd4 Qg6 21.Kh2 c5 

White resigned

There is not a lot in 22.g4 cxd4 23.gxf5 Qxf5 24.Qxd4. I could have kept playing, but it would have required an unforced blunder by my opponent to keep him from grinding me down. There were other games to play. 

Jerome Gambit: Sacrifice/Blunder?

A Jerome Gambit win, and some handy endgame play in another game, will allow me to move on to the 3rd round of play in both the "Italian Game Classic" and "Italian Game Battlegrounds" tournaments at Chess.com. There will be a bit of a wait, however, until I can play a few more Jerome Gambits, as each tournament has a number of games to complete before the round is finished.

The turning point in the following game reminds me of the light-hearted comment about giving up material: if it succeeds, it's a "sacrifice", if it fails, it's a "blunder". I would love to say that my chess has matured to the point where I made an intuitive sacrifice, but I have to admit that it was more of a fortunate oversight.

perrypawnpusher - mallack
Italian Game Battlegrounds, Chess.com, 2019

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

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

The Jerome Defense, first suggested by Alonzo Wheeler Jerome in an article in the Dubuque Chess Journal of July, 1874, and seen, initially, in Jaeger - Jerome, correspondence, 1880 (1-0, 40).

The Database has 665 game examples, with White scoring 50%. My own experience is a bit better: in 36 games, I scored 79%. (That probably reflects experience with the line.)

7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qg3 

As I noted in an earlier post

I experimented with Jerome's 8.Qf4+ in perrypawnpusher - Capt. Mandrake, Jerome Gambit 3 thematic tournament, ChessWorld.com, 2008 (1-0, 9) and perrypawnpusher - LeeBradbury, "Italian Game" Thematic, Chess.com, 2012 (1-0, 36).
I also tried 8.Qc3 in perrypawnpusher - Raankh, blitz, FICS, 2009 (0-1, 22).
There is not much difference in the strength between these two moves and the text, or even 8.Qh5, if Stockfish 9 is to be believed.

8...Nf6 9.Nc3 

I am not sure why I chose the text move over 9.d3. Before this game, I was 3 - 1 with 9.Nc3 and 5 - 1 with 9.d3. The two lines sometimes transpose, and 9.d3 brings White one step closer to resolving the issue of Black's annoying dark square Bishop, so, perhaps it should be played first.

9...Be6 

This was also played by Abhishek29 against me earlier this year. The move is good, and preserves Black's advantage, although it has the slight taint of placing the Bishop (possibly) in a place where an advancing White f-pawn might hit it.

10.O-O g6 

This move, a novelty, according to The Database, does several things. It resists a possible f2-f4-f5 by White; it protects the Black g-pawn from White's Queen, and it gives the Black King a place to step out of the way, to castle-by-hand and allow his Rook to get into play.

11.d3 Kg7 12.Na4 

Seriously?!

I was going to try this move, after the trials of my game against warwar, in the 3rd round of the Italian Battleground tournament (at Chess.com) earlier this year? Sure, the positions are not the same, but warwar did not meekly retreat his Bishop to b6, he brought it to d4, then e5 - and then threw in ...Nh5 for good measure. It was a messy game, even if I did weasel out a win.

Then, there was the additional anxiety related to my game against Abhishek29, when he did retreat the Bishop, and I was able to exchange it off.

Certainly, it was a time for in-depth concrete analysis - so, of course, I crossed my fingers for luck and just made the Knight move...

12...Bb6

Whew!

After the game, Stockfish 10 pointed out that 12...Bd4 13.c3 Be5 14.f4 would be hit by 14...Nh5. In fact, 13...Nh5 would have been good for Black, too. Yikes.

13.Nxb6 axb6 14.f4 Rxa2 

This took me by surprise. It should not have - in a similar position against Abhishek29, I had prevented the capture by playing a2-a3. But, is the loss of the pawn a big deal, any way? It turns out, it is not. This is the sacrifice/blunder of material that I referred to in the introduction to this game.

15.Rxa2 Bxa2 16.b3 

Black's Bishop has left his King, and is trapped. It is vulnerable to capture in a couple of moves, which explains Black's next choice.

16...Qa8 

In for a penny, in for a pound.

Black has grabbed the pawn, and now feels the need to protect the locked-in Bishop, even at the cost of removing another defender from the Kingside.

17.Bb2

This move reminded me of a booklet on the 2.b3 Sicilian that I bought in 1977, from Ron's Postal Chess Club, of all places. At the time, I was advancing the b-pawn one step against 1...c5 if I was feeling conservative, or two steps (the wing gambit) if I was feeling rowdy; and I even tried 2.b3 against the French and Caro Kann defenses. Nowadays you can find Sabotaging the Sicilian, French & Caro-Kann with 2.b3 by Jerzy Konikowski and Marek Soszynski.

Oh - back to the game. White's attack is about to come together.

17...Rf8 18.f5 

18...Qa5 19.fxg6 hxg6 20.Qf4 g5 21.Bxf6+ 

After the game, Stockfish 10 preferred 21...Qg4. I wanted my piece back, right away.

21...Kg8 22.Qg4 Qd2 

Black's Queen cannot save the day.

23.Bxg5 Black resigned

You probably saw the cute checkmate, instead, with 23.Qe6+ Kh7 24.Qe7 Rf7 25.Qxf7+ Kh6 26.Qg7+ Kh5 27.Qh7+ Kg4 28.Qh3#.

Please note the stranded Bishop on a2.