Jerome Gambit: Top Crunchy Numbers

Just for fun, I took a look at the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) games in The Database where one or both of the players was rated 2500 or higher (mostly in online blitz play).

There were 140 games where White was rated 2500 or higher (up to 3880), while his opponent was rated below 2500. In those games, White scored 87%.

There were 104 games where Black was rated 2500 or higher (up to 3860), while his opponent was rated below 2500. In those games, Black scored 88%.

Not surprisingly, even in Jerome Gambit games, grandmasters beat non-grandmasters.

Whether attacking or defending with the Jerome, it did not seem to matter at the 2500 level (or above), as the results with White and Black were almost the same.

For the record, there were 57 games where both White and Black were rated 2500 or higher. White scored 58%.

Does that suggest an edge to the Jerome Gambit player, even at the higher level?

Jerome Gambit: Bullet Play

Winning with the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) in a bullet game can be a challenge.

Defending against the Jerome Gambit in a bullet game can be equally as difficult.

In the following game Black is able to hold on against a Jerome Gambit bullet specialist for almost a dozen moves - and then his game falls apart. 

angelcamina - Yorkiechess95

1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2022

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

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 

7.Qd5+ Kf8 8.Qxc5+ d6 9.Qb5 Bd7  

Black decides that his b-pawn is expendable.

angelcamina has also faced 9...Nf6, e.g. 10.Nc3 c6 11.Qe2 Qe7 12.O-O Kf7 13.f4 Re8 14.d3 Kg8 15.b3 d5 16.e5 Nd7 17.d4 c5 18.Ba3 b6 19.Nb5 Ndf8 20.Nd6 Rd8 21.Nxc8 Raxc8 22.f5 Nh4 23.Qg4 g6 24.f6 Qe6 25.Qxh4 cxd4 26.Qxd4 Rxc2 27.Rac1 Rdc8 28.Rxc2 Rxc2 29.Bb2 Nd7 30.f7+ Kf8 31.Ba3+ Kg7 32.Qf4 Nf8 33.Bxf8+ White won on time, angelcamina - Leon81, 1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2022) 

10.Qxb7 Rb8 11.Qxa7 

He has also played 11.Qd5 Nf6 12.Qc4 Ne5 13.Qd4 Kf7 14.O-O Re8 15.f4 Nc6 16.Qc4+ Be6 17.Qxc6 Rb6 18.Qa4 Bd7 19.Qa3 Nxe4 20.d3 Nc5 21.Nc3 Re3 22.Bxe3 Ra6 23.Qb4 Ra4 24.Nxa4 Black resigned   angelcamina - kinggambitattacker, 1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2022 

11...Qf6 

A mistake. Now everything falls apart.

12.Qxb8+ Be8 13.Qxc7 N8e7 14.O-O Ne5 15.d4 Ng4 16.h3 Nh6 17.e5 Qf5 18.exd6 Nd5 19.Qc5 Bf7 20.Nc3 g6 21.Nxd5 Bxd5 22.Bxh6+ Kg8 23.d7 Qxd7 24.Qf8 checkmate

Banks Update

 

I have heard from Pete Banks ("blackburne") - see the recent "Jerome Gambit - Mind-Blowing Checkmate" and "Jerome Gambit: Earlier Days" - and he assures  me that he is still playing chess, both over-the-board and online.

An early adopter of the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) - The Database has about 170 of his games, from 2003 through 2011 - Pete will still occasionally get in a Jerome, although he specializes in the King's Gambit these days.

Here is a recent game of his. Something about that 6th move and the checkmate seems familiar...

pb-hal - Robertoottobre1961

Antelacus CC vs Birmingham CC, Chess.com, 2022

1.e4 e5 2.f4 

2...exf4 3.Nf3 d6 4.Bc4 

4...g5 5.h4 Bg4 6.Bxf7+ 

6...Kxf7 7.Nxg5+ Ke8 8.Qxg4 Nd7 9.Qh5+ Ke7 10.Qf7 checkmate

Well, that was quick... Nice work, Pete!

When Will Magnus Carlsen Play the Jerome Gambit?

Recent games by the World Champion, Magnus Carlsen in a Titled Tuesday tournament at Chess.com featured a series of unusual openings. 

It might cause one to wonder: If this continues, will Grandmaster Magnus Carlsen one day play the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+)?

By the way, Grandmaster Mamedov resigned after move 1, concerned that the World Champion was mocking his opponents with such play. (I suspect that some players, when faced with the Jerome, have felt mocked, but I do not know of any time where they immediately resigned in protest.)

On the other hand, Grandmaster Nakamura, no stranger to creative play, started with his own unusual opening, and garnered the full point.

Take a look.

Katz, Alexander - Carlsen, M., Titled Tue 11th Oct Early, Chess.com, 2022 (0-1, 35);

Ibarra Jerez, JC. - Carlsen, M. Titled Tue 11th Oct Early, Chess.com, 2022 (0-1, 83);

Sanal, V. - Carlsen, M., Titled Tue 11th Oct Late, Chess.com, 2022 (1-0, 59); and

Mamedov, Rau - Carlsen, M., Titled Tue 11th Oct Late, Chess.com, 2022 (0-1, 1)

Carlsen, M. - Gabdrakhmanov, Azat, Titled Tue 11th Oct Late, Chess.com, 2022 (1-0, 32);

Carlsen, M. - Makhnev, Denis, Titled Tue 11th Oct Late, Chess.com, 2022 (1-0, 38):

Carlsen, M. - Rustemov, A., Titled Tue 11th Oct Late, Chess.com, 2022 (1-0, 49);

Carlsen, M. - Slugin, S., Titled Tue 11th Oct Late, Chess.com, 2022 (1-0, 20);

Carlsen, M. - Riehle, Marco, Titled Tue 11th Oct Late, Chess.com, 2022 (1-0, 41);

Carlsen, M. - Fedoseev, Vl3, Titled Tue 11th Oct Late, Chess.com, 2022 (1-0, 33);

Carlsen, M. - Andreikin, D., Titled Tue 11th Oct Late, Chess.com, 2022 (1/2-1/2, 70); and

Carlsen, M. - Lazavik, Denis, Titled Tue 11th Oct Late, Chess.com, 2022 (1-0, 44)

Carlsen, M. - Yeletsky, Ivan, Titled Tue 11th Oct Late, Chess.com, 2022 (1-0, 41)

Kovalenko, I. - Carlsen, M., Titled Tue 11th Oct Late, Chess.com, 2022 (0-1, 36); and

Thomforde-Toates, Noah - Carlsen, M., Titled Tue 11th Oct Late, Chess.com, 2022 (0-1, 32)

Nakamura, Hi - Carlsen, M., Titled Tue 11th Oct Late, Chess.com, 2022 (1-0, 32)

Holt, C. - Carlsen, M., Titled Tue 11th Oct Late, Chess.com, 2022 (0-1, 29)

Melkumyan, H. - Carlsen, M., Titled Tue 11th Oct Late, Chess.com, 2022 (0-1, 41)

Jerome Gambit: Earlier Days...

Yesterday's post mentioned early Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) explorer Pete Banks - blackburne in online games, whose name has been attached to the Banks Variation (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Kf8 6.Qh5) - and got me thinking about earlier days...

Before starting this blog, I wrote a substantial article on the Jerome Gambit and submitted it to Stefan Bücker's chess magazine Kaissiber. Bücker tried repeatedly to edit the piece to make it publishable - see "Delusions of Grandeur" - but it was a lot like trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear... He could not make it work.

Kaissiber ended its publication before Bücker was able to do so, reminding me a bit of Ben Bova's 1966 short story, "Stars Won't You Hide Me" (see review).

In any event, I finally posted the article on this blog. See "The Jerome Gambit Article (Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8)".

Not wanting to dip into the article too much before it saw publication, I encouraged Pete to contact International Master Gary Lane as the Jerome Gambit point man, which he easily was able to do, hence the appearance of blackburne - karmmark, Jerome Gambit thematic tournament, ChessWorld.net, 2007 in two of IM Lane's ChessCafe.com "Opening Lanes" articles titled "The Good Old Days" and "Chess Made Easy" as well as his book book The Greatest Chess Tricks and Traps (2008).

So there are any number of people these days who connect Pete Banks through his games with the Jerome Gambit, while being unaware of Alonzo Wheeler Jerome himself. This kind of thing has happened before, as I noted in "The Jerome-Kennedy Gambits!?" 

As I noted in my afterward to the posts on the Literary Digest game [see Parts 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5], Mr. Jerome has had a hard time holding on to "his" opening: sources such as Cook's Synopsis of the Chess Openings (1882), The American Supplement (1884), and Freeborough and Rankin's Chess Openings Ancient and Modern, (1889) were happy to keep the name "Jerome Gambit", but identified the chief analyst of the opening as "Mr. S. A. Charles of Cincinnati, Ohio." Sic transit gloria mundi.

I am hoping that Pete reads the previous post and this one, and contacts me. I bet he has some very interesting Jerome Gambits to share.

Jerome Gambit: Mind-Blowing Checkmate

I was happy to recently run across the YouTube.com video "Jerome Gambit | Chess opening tips & tricks to WIN FAST!! #shorts" from Chessliker featuring a quick 10-move "mind-blowing checkmate".

The line - actually, a game - was earlier featured in the video "jerome gambit । the jerome gambit । how to play the jerome gambit । The Master Tricks । chess traps" by The Master Tricks as previously mentioned here in "Jerome Gambit: Relaxing".

It has also appeared in Grandmaster Simon Williams' “My Favorite Opening Traps”.

Going back further in time, as noted in "International Master Gary Lane", the game was identified as blackburne - karmmark, Jerome Gambit thematic tournament, ChessWorld.net, 2007. The game was presented in two of IM Lane's ChessCafe.com "Opening Lanes" articles titled "The Good Old Days" and "Chess Made Easy" - the ChessCafe site is no longer functional, but I have linked to the essays via the Wayback Machine.

The blog post "The extraordinary and forgotten Jerome Gambit" (the title is from a quote in John Elburg's online review of the book below) also notes that blackburne - Karmark 2007 appeared in International Master Gary Lane's book The Greatest Chess Tricks and Traps (2008).

Of course, the "blackburne" in question is not Joseph Henry Blackburne of the legendary Amateur - Blackburne, London, 1884, game, but Pete Banks, early Jerome Gambit enthusiast, some of whose games can be found in "The Pete Banks Annotated Collection" and who presented "Learn Chess with Pete".

Was H.Nakamura Right? Is JG ‘Unbreakable’, Is EG ‘Legendary’ For Beginners’ Games? (Part 1)

 Was H.Nakamura Right? Is JG ‘Unbreakable’, Is EG ‘Legendary’  

For Beginners’ Games? (Part 1)   

  

(by Yury V. Bukayev) 

 

 

If an expert’s appraisal is based on something without real proofs, he can be right or “almost right” here sometimes. That is so, even in the case where he realizes that his appraisal is hasty, or non-serious, or bold, or emotional. Sometimes he is right here for a large per cent (for example, 55, 75 or 95) of cases which he appraises. 

 

We remember Rick Kennedy’s post ‘Jerome Gambit: Which Tier? Unbreakable?’ (September 23, 2020) where the notable dialogue about the standard system of the Jerome gambit between Top GM Hikaru Nakamura and IM Levy Rozman was shown as the part of their popular video and as its approximate text. Thus, they have discussed there what chess opening tier for beginners’ practice is right for it. The end of this text contains several phrases by Mr. Nakamura where he places the standard system of JG near the top of ‘Unbreakable’. Mr. Nakamura’s words contain no proofs of this very high appraisal. In my opinion, the tier’s name ‘Unbreakable’ is very arguable, because we discuss an opening practice, not an opening theory: each opening can be broken in a game as a result of practical mistakes of a player. But this name plays no role for us, just this very high appraisal of 4.Bxf7+ for beginners’ practice is important for our consideration.  

  

It was enough difficult for me to prove this Hikaru Nakamura’s appraisal, for a large per cent of cases. It was necessary to choose a certain control of time for beginners’ games, and I have chosen an unlimited one. I wasn’t sure that my success is guaranteed, but fortunately one month ago I have invented the following new trap for the standard system of JG:  

 

Trap 1. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 (Black defends his pieces, it is a typical response for an unlimited game) 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.d4 Bxd4 9.f4 AN Nc6 (Black defends his pieces with a large triumph) 10.b3 Bxa1?? (10…Ke7, and Black wins) 11.Ba3+ Nb4 12.Bxb4+ c5 13.Qxc5+ Ke6 14.Qf5 checkmate.  

 

Why is this trap a proof? Why is it, it maybe, unique for the standard system of JG? All Black’s moves before the alone mistake (10…Bxa1) are very strong, the most natural for a chess beginner and extremely probable to make for everyone. And psychology of this mistake is extremely typical for a beginner: he usually accepts a very large opponent’s sacrifice immediately, he thinks mistakenly that his opponents blunder almost always in such cases etc. Moreover, when a beginner is a child (it’s the most typical case), his happiness to accept a very large opponent’s sacrifice is so large that he stops to think here often. That is why a surprised beginner will make all these Black’s moves including the alone mistake (10…Bxa1), most probably. It seems now to be probably a unique situation for JG. White will get a very large per cent of identical wins against surprised beginners.  

 

For comparison, here are my other new traps which I have invented almost two months ago, let’s understand why it isn’t clear that they are also the proofs: 

 

Trap 2. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qh3+ Ke7 8.Qc3 Bxf2+ 9.Kxf2 Qf8+ 10.Ke1 Qf4 11.Qc5+ Kd8 12.d3 AN (Or 12.d4 AN with the same idea. Of course, these both moves are weak.) 12…Qxc1+ 13.Ke2 Qxh1?? (13…d6, and Black wins) 14.Qf8 checkmate. 

 

Trap 3. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Nc3 d6 8.b4 AN Bd4 9.Nd5 (This move is weak.) 9…Bxa1?? 10.Qf5 checkmate. 

 

We can see, it isn’t clear that in the Trap 2 and in the Trap 3 some of Black’s moves before his alone mistake are the most natural for a beginner. (Analogously, after 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.Nc3 it isn’t clear, is 8…Qf6! 9.d4 Qxf5 the most natural way for beginner. Probably, it is really the most natural way for him, because he feels usually that White’s Queen can become very dangerous here. That is why White can make nothing.) Thus, it isn’t clear that we have proofs here.    

 

It maybe, the invention of the Trap 1 and this new approach will cause Mr. Nakamura’s and Mr. Rozman’s wish to replace the standard system of JG into their top tier ‘Legendary’. In any case, I suggest to name this trap as the ‘First Golden Beginner’s Trap’.  

 

Further, we can start to look at the Evans gambit (EG), but at first I would like to suggest Mr. Nakamura (who has placed EG into the tier ‘Legendary’) to add at least one gambit into this top tier: it is any of Evans-Bukayev gambits (for example, the Morphy-Bukayev gambit, it was played first by the great maestro Paul Charles Morphy), where defender’s pawn h6/h3 prevents from his successful defence in a lot of cases where attacker’s winning Jerome-ish blow is possible. 

 

 

Contact the author:  istinayubukayev@yandex.ru  

 

© 2022 Yury V. Bukayev (Copyright © Bukayev Yury Vyacheslavovich 2022). All rights reserved.  

[A legal using of this investigation with a reference to it is permitted  

and doesn’t require author’s consent.]