Welcome to the World of Wall

Of late, Bill Wall (see Chessville's "Bill Wall's Wonderful World of Chess") has been investigating the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) and other Jerome-ish openings.

I've had fun playing over a number of his games and have decided to present several, starting in his pre-Jerome Gambit era. Even early on, his brand of wild, brash and outrageous play had some Jerome-ish tinges to it.

Watt,B - Wall

Taylorsville, NC, 1975

1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Bc5

Having his own ideas, but this was too much for his opponent to sit still and take.

3.Na4

Cue the scary violin music: we have seen this before in "Godfather of the Jerome Gambit? Part I, Part II, Part III", "Godfather of Oz??" and "Hamppe - Meitner Revealed".

3...Bxf2+ 4.Kxf2 Qh4+

5.Ke3 Qf4+ 6.Kd3

6...Nf6

Hampe - Meitner, Vienna, 1870 continued 6...d5 7.Kc3 Qxe4 8.Kb3 Na6 9.a3 Qxa4+ 10.Kxa4 Nc5+ 11.Kb4 a5+ 12.Kxc5 Ne7 13.Bb5+ Kd8 14.Bc6 b6+ 15.Kb5 Nxc6 16.Kxc6 Bb7+ 17.Kb5 Ba6+ draw

7.Nc3

In the September 2002 issue of Chess Life, Grandmaster Andy Soltis suggested 7.Qf3 as an improvement in this line. (I have no idea if he was familiar with Bill's game here.)

7...d5

8.Qe1

Understandably faltering under pressure. Rybka suggests that White could find his way to a balanced game with: 8.Qf3 dxe4+ 9.Nxe4 Bf5 10.Qxf4 exf4 11.Ke2 Nxe4 12.d3 Nf6 13.Bxf4 Nc6 14.Nf3 0-0-0 15.Re1 Nd5 16.Bg3 Ndb4

analysis diagram





8...dxe4+ 9.Kc4 e3+

It's "open season" on Kings...

10.Kb3 Nc6 11.a3 Be6+ White resigned

 

Chesstalk

I just stopped by the Chesstalk website with my mind on the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) and read the following exchange including Jerome Gambit Gemeinde member Louis Morin, aka mrjoker...

Louis Morin
Location: Montréal
Re : Re: Gambiteers Unite

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin Pacey

Even against much weaker players, I would just use the Evans, or possibly the KG, nowadays if I was in the mood to gambit against 1.e4 e5.

Why not the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+)? There is a very entertaining blog dedicated to it: http://jeromegambit.blogspot.com/

--------------------------------------------------------------------------Kevin Pacey  
Re: Re : Re: Gambiteers Unite

Quote:

Originally Posted by Louis Morin

Why not the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+)? There is a very entertaining blog dedicated to it: http://jeromegambit.blogspot.com/

Oddly or not, I don't think I have any books that mention this gambit.

I visited your given linked blog briefly, and I saw that the author was interested in the Jerome Gambit as White, but even the analysis given there seemed to show that Black is quite fine in theory, if he plays properly, despite the ultimate result of the games given.

As I mentioned in a comment on the Goring Gambit in an earlier post, I gave that one up as soon as I convinced myself Black could equalize by force. I'm sure that, like with the Jerome Gambit, I could beat a weaker/much weaker player with it, or almost any opening, but usually, if the game matters at all, I'd stick to my principles and play an opening that has a better theoretical status for White. In the case of the Jerome Gambit, White probably shouldn't even get equality if Black plays well.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin Pacey
Re: Re : Re: Gambiteers Unite

Quote:

Originally Posted by Louis Morin

Why not the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+)? There is a very entertaining blog dedicated to it: http://jeromegambit.blogspot.com/

This blog mentions the sequence 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6. To show that people play just about anything, an expert-strength player in my old Brampton club (then not CFC rating its games) played this 'opening' now and then. Apperently it had some theory devoted to it, at least back in his homeland.

White needs to play precisely, it would seem, to make the most out of his position. My own analysis (without a computer or books, etc.) would go:

4.d4!

(if 4.0-0 Black has 4...Nf6 and after 5.d4 he can play 5...d6 without dropping a pawn; if 4.c3 Nf6 5.d4 then possible is 5...exd4 [5...d6 is 'solid'] with the idea 6.cxd4 Bb4+ and Black has the extra move ...h6 included in an otherwise normal mainline, or 6.e5 with the idea 6...d5 7.Bb5 Ne4 and if 8.Nxd4 White almost has a mainline position, except Black has traded ...h6 for c2-c3, which may not be too much of a gain for White)

4...exd4

(4...d6? drops a pawn after 5.dxe5)

5.0-0!

(not 5.Nxd4 when Black can play 5...Nf6 or the more adventurous 5...Ne5)

and White has a favourable version of a normal mainline, where Black has substituted ...h6 for the more useful ...Nf6. Play might continue 5...Bc5 6.c3! and if 6...dxc3 (better is 6...d3, but White stands better after 7.b4) 7.Bxf7+! (a familiar trick for Italian/Evans Gambit players) 7...Kxf7 8.Qd5+, intending Qxc5 with advantage.

For example, now 8...Ke8 (to avoid Qxc5 with check) could be answered by 9.Qxc5 anyway, with advantage in spite of ...cxb2 since the displacement of the Black king is worth more than the pawn. However 9.Qh5+ works, as 9...g6 10.Qxg6+ Kf8 (10...Ke7 11.Qg7+) 11.Qf5+ Qf6 (or ...Nf6) allows 12.Qxc5 with check anyway, followed by Qxc3.


(Thanks to Louis for suggesting the Jerome Gambit. A note for Kevin: GM Pavel Blatny has played 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 with Black, a number of times, with success. Thanks for your analysis, too! -- RK)

A Strange, But Intriguing, Path (Part 3)

Let's take a final look at a strange variation of the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf 7+) that we started with two days ago, and continued yesterday – see "A Strange, But Intriguing, Path (Part 1)" and (Part 2).

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

 

 
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5 Ke6
 

6.Qg4+ Kxe5

If White is going to have a chance in this variation, he must sacrifice the second piece. If Black then wishes to play on, he must accept the piece.

If 6.Qg4+ Kf6, then 7.Qf5+ Ke7 8.Qf7+ Kd6 9.Nc4 checkmate.

If 6.Qg4+ Kd6 7.Nf7+ wins.

If 6.Qg4+ Ke7 7.Qxg7+ Kd6 8.Nf7+ wins.

7.d4+

Again, best.

Two games with the alternative 7.f4+:  7...Kf6 8.Qg5+ (8.Qh4+ Kf7 9.Qxd8 Nxd8 10.c3 Nf6 11.d4 Bb6 12.e5 Nd5 13.0-0 d6 14.Nd2 dxe5 15.fxe5+ Ke7 16.Ne4 g6 17.Bg5+ Ke8 18.Rae1 Rf8 19.Rxf8+ Kxf8 20.Bxd8 Bf5 21.Bg5 Bxe4 22.Rxe4 c5 23.c4 Ne7 24.d5 Nf5 25.g4 Nd4 26.d6 Ne6 27.Bd2 Ke8 28.h3 Kd7 29.Bc3 Rf8 30.Bd2 g5 31.Re2 h6 32.Kh2 Nd4 33.Rg2 Nf3+ 34.Kg3 Nxd2 35.Rxd2 Ke6 36.Re2 Ba5 37.h4 gxh4+ 38.Kxh4 a6 39.a3 b5 40.cxb5 axb5 41.b3 b4 42.a4 Bd8+ 43.Kh5 Rf4 44.Re3 Bg5 45.Rd3 Black forfeited on time, Petasluk - Ijon, blitz FICS, 2007 ) Kf7 9.Qd5+ Ke8 10.Qxc5 d6 11.Qf2 Qe7 12.d3 Nf6 13.Nc3 Be6 14.h3 Kd7 15.Be3 g6 16.0-0-0 a5 17.Rhe1 a4 18.d4 Bc4 19.e5 Nd5 20.Nxd5 Bxd5 21.c4 Bxc4 22.d5 Nb4 23.exd6 Qxd6 24.Bc5 Nd3+ 25.Rxd3 Qf6 26.Rc3 Bxd5 27.Re7+ Kd8 28.Rxc7 Ke8 29.Qe3+ Be6 30.Re7+ Qxe7 31.Bxe7 Kxe7 32.Rc7+ Kf6 33.Rxb7 Rac8+ White forfeited on time, Petasluk - scaccopazzoo, blitz FICS, 2004.

7...Bxd4

Capturing with the Knight turns out worse in the end: 7...Nxd4 8.Bf4+ Kf6 (8...Kxe4 9.Nc3 checkmate) 9.Bg5+ Kf7 10.Bxd8 and Black's threat to fork White's King and Rook doesn't work, i.e. 10...Nxc2+ 11.Kd2 Nxa1 12.Qh5+ Kf8 13.Qxc5+ Ke8 14.Bxc7 as White will get two pieces for the Rook after, say, 14...Nf6 15.Nc3.

analysis diagram







8.Bf4+ Kf6 9.Bg5+ Kf7 10.Bxd8 Nxd8

Or 10...Bxb2 11.Qf3+ Ke8 12.Bxc7 Bxa1 13.Na3 Nf6 14.0-0 when, despite Black having two pieces and a Rook for the Queen, Rybka sees White as a bit better!

analysis diagram




11.Qg3

Again, Rybka gives White the edge, not only because the b-pawn is protected (11...Bxb2 12.Qb3+) but because Black is undeveloped and his King is at risk.

This kind of analysis, treating the Jerome Gambit as if it were a "real" opening, is becoming more necessary as knowledge of the opening increases and its use becomes more widespread. Some lines now need preparation beyond a brave sense of advanture.

A Strange, But Intriguing, Path (Part 2)

Let's continue to take a look at a strange variation of the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf 7+) that we started with yesterday – see "A Strange, But Intriguing, Path (Part 1)"

blackburne - DREWBEAR

JG Tourney4, Chessworld, 2009

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

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Ke6

This can't be good, can it?

6.f4

Inadequate is 6.Nc4 Qf6 (6...Qh4!? 7.Qe2 Nd4 8.Qd3 Nf6 [stronger than 8...Nxc2+ 9.Qxc2 Qxf2+ 10.Kd1 Qxg2 11.Re1 Qxh2] 9.Nc3 d5 10.exd5+ Kf7 11.Ne3 Re8 12.Ne2 Rxe3 13.dxe3 Bf5) 7.Qg4+ Ke7 8.0-0 h6 9.Nc3 d5 10.Nxd5+ Black resigned, jecree - larsgoran, FICS,  2008

Tricky is 6.d4, as the pawn is poisoned, provided that White responds to either 6...Nxd4 or 6...Bxd4 with 7.Qg4+ (7.Nf3 may draw).

After 6.d4 Nxe5 (6...Nf6 is best met by 7.Nf3 with an edge to White) 7.dxe5 d6 (7...Kxe5? 8.Qd5+ Kf6 9.Bg5+ Kg6 10.Qf5+ Kh5 11.g4 checkmate) 8.Nc3 Black has an edge. 

6...Nxe5

7.fxe5

This does not turn out well. Rybka actually recommends 7.d4 as best for White, although, as you might guess, Black has an advantage in all variations.

7...Qh4+

Here's the trouble.

8.Ke2

Worse was 8.g3 Qxe4+ 9.Qe2 Qxh1+ 10.Qf1 Qxf1+ 11.Kxf1 Kxe5 12.c3 Ke6 13.d4 Bd6 14.Nd2 b6 15.Ne4 Bb7 16.Ng5+ Kf6 17.Bd2 h6 18.Nh3 Rf8 19.Ke2 Re8+ 20.Kd3 Ne7 21.Rf1+ Kg6 22.Nf2 Rhf8 23.Be3 Nd5 24.Bd2 b5 25.g4 Rf3+ 26.Kc2 Ne3+ 27.Bxe3 Rexe3 28.h4 Re2+ 29.Kb3 Rfxf2 30.Rg1 Rxb2 checkmate, Superpippo - MrJaggers, FICS, 2002

8...Qxe4+ 9.Kf1 Nh6 10.Nc3 Rf8+ White Resigned

A Strange, But Intriguing, Path (Part 1)

If I face the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) any time soon (not likely; see "I expected better...") I'd like to try out a relatively new, but strange and intriguing opening idea...

theprof - Brown

FICS, 2005

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

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Ke6

What an odd move! Yet, there are 10 examples in the New Year's Database, and White only scored 30% in those games. As I've noted, this bears examination.

6.Nxc6 dxc6

My first thought: If 6.Nxc6 is the recommended response to the venerable 5...Kf8 – see "Critical Line: 5...Kf8 (1), (2),(3), and (Revisited)" – it should be the first thing to try when the Black King is even further afield.

Oddly, Rybka sees Black with his King on e6 as only 1/10th of a pawn or so worse than when the King is on f8. Overall, it sees Black as still being not quite a pawn better than White.

By the way, after 6.Nxc6, 6...dxc6 is the proper way to capture, not 6...bxc6, as the former prevents White from playing d2-d4 and opens up the c8-h3 diagonal for Black's light-squared Bishop, giving some protection to the King.

I have only one example of  the wrong capture, a back-and-forth game where Black finally won on time: 6...bxc6 7.0-0 [7.Qg4+ is the winning move: White will be able to either check the King and then win the Bishop; or capture on g7 with check and then win the Rook] Nf6 8.d4 Bb6 9.Nc3 Ba6 10.Re1 Kf7 11.Bg5 h6 12.Bh4 g5 13.Bg3 Qe8 14.Qf3 Kg7 15.e5 Nd5 16.Nxd5 cxd5 17.Qxd5 Qe6 18.Qe4 Raf8 19.c3 Rf5 20.a4 c6 21.b4 Bc4 22.a5 Bc7 23.Qe3 a6 24.f4 Rhf8 25.fxg5 Rxg5 26.Bh4 Rg6 27.Bf6+ Kh7 28.Rf1 d6 29.Rf3 dxe5 30.dxe5 Bd5 31.Rg3 Rfg8 32.Rf1 Rxg3 33.hxg3 Bxe5 34.Bxe5 Rg6 35.Qf4 Bc4 36.Rf2 Rg8 37.Qf7+ Qxf7 38.Rxf7+ Bxf7 39.Bd4 Bd5 40.Kf2 Rf8+ 41.Ke3 Rf1 42.Ke2 Rc1 43.Kd2 Rf1 44.Ke2 Rf5 45.Ke3 Kg6 46.Kd3 Rg5 47.g4 Rxg4 48.Ke3 Rxg2 White forfeited on time, fehim - Pawnshop, FICS, 2009

7.Qg4+

White's best.

7...Ke7

Critical was 7...Kf6, when White should loosen Black's Kingside with 8.Qh5+ g5 9.Qg3 followed by d2-d3 and possibly h2-h4 or f2-f4, when Black will still have an edge.

The text is an error which White immediately exploits.

8.Qxg7+ Kd6 9.Qxh8 Ne7 10.Qxh7 (better was 10.Qxd8+) Be6 11.d3 Qd7 12.Be3 (12.Bf4 checkmate) Rf8 13.Bxc5+ (13.e5+ Kxe5 14.Qg7+ Rf6 15.Qg3+ Rf4 16.Qxf4+ Kd5 17.Nc3 checkmate) Kxc5 14.Nc3 Kb6 15.f3 a6 16.Qh4 Ka7 17.Qf2+ Kb8 18.0-0-0 Ng6 19.Kb1 Nf4 20.g3 Ng6 21.f4 Ne7 22.h3 Bg8 23.g4 Nc8 24.f5 Qf7 25.b3 Nb6 26.Kb2 a5 27.Ra1 a4 28.Nxa4 Nxa4+ 29.bxa4 b6 30.Qd4 Kb7 31.Qc4 Qxc4 32.dxc4 Bxc4 33.Rad1 Re8 34.Rde1 Ka6 35.e5 Ka5 36.e6 Kxa4 37.f6 Bxe6 38.Re3 Kb5 39.Rhe1 Kc5 40.Rxe6 Rf8 41.g5 Kb5 42.R1e5+ c5 43.Re7 Ka6 44.Rxc7 Kb5 45.Ree7 Rd8 46.Rcd7 Rb8

The game was drawn here because both players had run out of time. However, White has had a significant advantage for quite a while.

With the Pawns, Against the Bishop

Here we have another Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) game (see "Ending in the Wilderness") that concludes with an unusual and instructive endgame.

Once again, the Jerome Gambit has lessons to teach.

perrypawnpusher - jonathankochems

2 12 blitz FICS, 2010

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

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

Certainly a good defense for Black, one of the many refutations of the Jerome Gambit. It was given by Jerome in his July 1874 article in the Dubuque Chess Journal. He also played the defense in two correspondence games against Daniel Jaeger in 1880, winning both.

7.Qxe5 Qe7

Putting immediate pressure on the e-file and on the pawn at e4 in particular, as well as offering to exchange Queens to extinguish White's attack.

8.Qf4+ Nf6 9.Nc3 d6

Jerome played 9...c6 in each of his games, winning both.

10.0-0 Kf7

The text is stronger than 10...Bd4, which appeared in perrypawnpusher - ERICOLSON, blitz FICS, 2007:  11.d3 a6 12.Ne2 c6 13.Nxd4 b5 14.Nxc6 Qe6 15.Nd4 Qe7 16.Bd2 Kg8 17.Nf5 Qc7 18.Qxd6 Qxd6 19.Nxd6 Be6 20.f4 g6 21.Bc3 Nd7 22.Bxh8 Kxh8 23.f5 gxf5 24.exf5 Bd5 25.Rae1 Nf6 26.Ne4 Bxe4 27.dxe4 Rc8 28.e5 Nd5 29.e6 Rxc2 30.e7 Nxe7 31.Rxe7 Rxb2 32.f6 Rd2 33.Re8 checkmate

11.d3 Rf8 12.Nd5 Qe5

Black is happy with his game: he is about to complete castling-by-hand, and he hopes to trade off White's attacking Queen, the one dangerous piece that his opponent has deployed.

13.Nxc7 Qxf4 14.Bxf4 Rb8

I was happy with my position, too. With three pawns for the missing piece, I thought my chances were about equal. Later, Rybka agreed.

15.Nd5

After the game, Rybka recommended instead 15.d4 Bxd4 16.Bxd6 Nxe4 17.Bxf8 Kxf8 18.c3 Bb6 19.Nd5 Bd8 20.Rfe1 Nf6 21.Rad1 Kf7 22.Nxf6 Bxf6 which it judged as equal. White has a Rook and two pawns to Black's two Bishops.

analysis diagram





15...Nxd5 16.exd5 Bf5 17.Rae1

17...Bb4

Black's Bishop and White's Rook play hide-and-seek. The play for the next few moves is understandable, but could be improved upon.

18.Re2 Rbc8 19.a3 Bc5 20.b4 Bd4 21.Bxd6

This is probably one of those positions where it would be better to leave a weakness (the Black pawn at d6) in place than to actually capture it.

Black now has the simple (although neither jonathankochems nor I saw it at the time) 21...Rfd8 which allows for the capture of the White pawn on d5 – all White has accomplished is to open the position favorably for Black's pieces.

21...Rfe8 22.Rfe1 Bc3

This move is a double slip. First, Black should have punished his opponent's last move with 22...Rxe2 23.Rxe2 Bxd3 since the Bishop cannot be captured unless White wishes to allow a back rank mate. Second, White now has a nifty move that was hard to see – literally.

23.Rxe8

This move allows for the exchange of heavy pieces, and a generally even endgame. Instead, moving the Rook one step less – 23.Re7+ – was the right idea: 23...Rxe7 24.Rxe7+ Kf6 25.Rxb7 when White would have 5 pawns to balance Black's Bishop.

23...Rxe8 24.Rxe8 Kxe8

It is a bit unusual to have an endgame with 8 pawns on one side, except in problems or compositions. Rybka sees the game as even. White has what winning chances there are in the position; and of course if he can exchange Black's dark-squared Bishop for a few pawns, he has the sanctuary of a Bishops-of-opposite-colors ending to seek out.

25.Bc5 a6 26.Kf1 Bb2 27.a4 Bd7 28.a5 Ba4

The Bishops work together, herding the pawns.

29.c4 Bc2 30.Ke2 Bc3 31.Ke3 Kd7 32.Ke4

32...Be1 33.f4 Bc3 34.Bd4

An oversight. I had calculated only as far as 34...Bxb4 35.Bxg7. Perhaps White can hold the draw after 35...Bxa5 35.f5 followed by c4-c5 and a general pawn advance on the Kingside – but this was sloppy play, which I immediately corrected.

34...Bxb4 35.Bb6

Not too much damage done.

35...Kd6 36.f5 Bc3 37.g4

37...Bf6 38.Ke3

Unpinning the pawn at d3, but giving Black chances. Rybka suggested 38.Bd4 instead, keeping the game balanced. 

38...Ke5

There are a couple of things wrong with this move. First, 38...Bd1 39.h3 h5 40.Kf4 hxg4 41.hxg4 Bc3 42.g5 Bd2+ was the way to play for advantage.

39.Bc7 checkmate

That's the second thing wrong with the move.