Saturday, August 18, 2012

Follow the Yellow Brick Road...


Here is a recent Jerome Gambit game with overtones from the movie "The Wizard of Oz".

frizerkaHR - KnightWorker
blitz, FICS, 2012

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 



4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.d4 

Originally Alonzo Wheeler Jerome's choice over 6.Qh5+.

6...Bb4+ 7.c3

This is an interesting sideline, explored in "Here... No, There... No, Here... No, There..." and earlier. The second player often seems uncomfortable, which is odd, as he is two pieces up. If he follows the idea of returning a piece and continuing his game (if he stays on the "yellow brick road") he will maintain his advantage.

7...Nc6 

As good a move as any, although I don't think that it has been looked at before on this site.

8.cxb4 Nf6 

This is a bit too casual and qualifies as one step off of the "yellow brick road". Probably 8... d5 9.b5 Nce7 was the right idea.

9.e5 Ne8 10.Qb3+

White steps off the bricks, too. Here Houdini prefers 10.b5 Ne7 11.Qb3+ Kf8 12.O-O h6 13.f4 d6 with a messy position that it considers equal.

10...Kf8

Again, 10... d5 was probably the right idea.

11.O-O 

Of course, 11.b5 was possible as well.

11...Nxd4

12.Qc3 

Ooof! The kind of a move that leaves Dorothy at risk of mischief by the flying monkeys!

Houdini, a bit of a wizard itself, suggests, instead, 12.Qd1 Nc6 13.Qf3+ Kg8 14.Qd5+ Kf8 15.b5 Ne7 16.Qf3+ Kg8 17.Qb3+ Kf8 and a likely draw by repetition.

12... Ne2+ Black resigned



Friday, August 17, 2012

Inspired



My most recent Jerome Gambit game (an Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit, a relatively more difficult line for me), was a rather sketchy affair, with both my opponent and me missing multiple opportunities to put the game away, even as we both dove into time troubles.

Inspired by Philidor1792's play with the extra "Jerome pawns" against Black's extra piece, I persevered, reaching a position that was winning for White.


perrypawnpusher - Velascovillar
blitz, FICS, 2012

54.d5

This "safety play," eliminating Black's last pawn and guaranteeing White at least a draw (while creating connected, passed, center pawns), is not correct.

Instead, I should have played 54.c5!, as the a1-h8 diagonal would then be cut off for Black's dark-squared Bishop, and White's advanced pawns would overwhelm his opponent's light-squared Bishop: e.g. 54...Bc7 55.h7, etc.

54...cxd5 55.cxd5 Bc7

This works, too, but more direct would have been 55...Bd4, when Black's Bishops and his King effectively blockade the White pawns, and the game is only drawn.

56.h7 

Superficially scary, but Black has everything under control once he stops the h-pawn with 56...Be5 and then plays ...Be8 to stop the center pawns. (It's like playing a Bishops-of-opposite-colors endgame with an extra Bishop.)

56...Bf5+

Now one of the pawns will be unstoppable.

57.Kg2 Be4+ 58.Kf2 Bb6+ 59.Be3 Black resigned



Thursday, August 16, 2012

Caveat

Statistics should always be approached with a decent amount of caution and skepticism, and that is especially true with the numbers given in my last few posts (see "The Jerome Gambit: Helping or Hurting?", "Furthermore", "And Then" and "Still").

For those who have gotten a chuckle out of my looks into The Database to see how much help or hindrance the Jerome Gambit proper (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+), the Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+), the Semi-Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.0-0 Nf6 5.Nc3 Bc5 6.Bxf7+) and the Semi-Italian Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.0-0 Bc5 5.Bxf7+) appeared to be having on the actual (versus expected) outcomes of my games, I further decided to see the effect of the Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4 4.Bxf7+). 

I found 37 of my games in The Database.

Since these largely involved situations where I was offering "Jerome Gambit odds," the average rating of my opponents was about 32 points below mine, meaning that my expected score in the games was about 54%.

However, I scored 91%, again favorably answering the question: Helping or Hurting?


Wednesday, August 15, 2012

Still

Continuing my look into The Database (see "The Jerome Gambit: Helping or Hurting?", "Furthermore" and "And Then"), where I had examined how much help or hindrance the Jerome Gambit proper (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+), the Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+), and the Semi-Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.0-0 Nf6 5.Nc3 Bc5 6.Bxf7+).were on the actual (versus expected) outcomes of my games, I decided to see the effect of the Semi-Italian Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.0-0 Bc5 5.Bxf7+). 

I found 46 of my games.

Again, as expected in situations where I was offering "Jerome Gambit odds," the average rating of my opponents was about 36 points below mine, meaning that my expected score in the games was about 55%.

I scored 91%.

That is enough for me to continue to play the Jerome.


Tuesday, August 14, 2012

And Then


Following the two previous posts (see "The Jerome Gambit: Helping or Hurting?" and "Furthermore"), where I had consulted The Database to see how much help or hindrance the Jerome Gambit proper (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) and the Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+), were on the actual (versus expected) outcomes of my games, I decided to see the effect of the Semi-Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.0-0 Nf6 5.Nc3 Bc5 6.Bxf7+).

I found 51 games.

As expected in situations where I was offering "Jerome Gambit odds," the average rating of my opponents was about 42 points below mine, meaning that my expected score in the games was about 56%.

I actually scored 78%.

The Semi-Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit seemed to be a help to my game.

Monday, August 13, 2012

Furthermore

After yesterday's post (see "The Jerome Gambit: Helping or Hurting?"), I thought it might be useful to consult The Database further and see how much help or hindrance the Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+), the Semi-Italian Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.0-0 Bc5 5.Bxf7+) and the Semi-Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.0-0 Nf6 5.Nc3 Bc5 6.Bxf7+) were on my expected outcomes.

I discovered 46 Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit games that I had played. 

Once again, as with the Jerome Gambit proper, the average rating of my opponents was less than my average rating (not surprising, given that I like to give "Jerome Gambit odds"), enough that I would be expected to score 60% in the games.

I actually scored 73%, enough to be mildly annoyed by 3...Nf6 instead of 3...Bc5, but, again, not enough to give up the Jerome.

Sunday, August 12, 2012

The Jerome Gambit: Helping or Hurting?

Looking at The Database today, I noticed that I had played 250 rated games with the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+).

My score was 83%, which I thought was pretty good.

Then I wondered: maybe I scored well because I simply played my refuted opening against weaker players...

So, I looked at my average rating for those games, and the average rating of my opponents, and it was true: my opponents were, generally, weaker.

By about 65 rating points.

That would mean that instead of playing equally-rated opponents and expecting to score 50%, I was playing slightly weaker opponents, and was expected to score about 60%.

Ooops!

With the Jerome Gambit I was still scoring 23% higher than expected.

I think I will keep playing the opening.