Learning from the Jerome

I like to think that playing the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4Bxf7+) will improve my tactics, or at least point me in that general direction. I think it did in the following game.

perrypawnpusher  - Banassi

blitz FICS, 2010

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Be7

The Hungarian Defense. No Jerome Gambit this time. (I know that some Jerome Gambit Gemeinde members – DragonTail and sTpny come to mind – fire off 4.Bxf7+ here, anyhow.)

4.0-0 Nf6 5.d3 d5 6.exd5 Nxd5 7.Nc3 Nxc3 8.bxc3 Bf5

9.Re1 Bf6 10.Ba3 Na5

Courting danger.

11.Bxf7+

There is something funny about this Jerome-style move, which I will get to later.

11...Kxf7 12.Nxe5+ Bxe5

This capture only helps White's attack. 12...Kg8 led to an even game.

13.Rxe5 g6 14.Rxa5 c6

15.Rxf5+

Of course.

15...gxf5 16.Qh5+ Ke6

Black's best move was 16...Kg7, but after the powerful 17.Bc5!? (intending to move to d4) he is in trouble whether or not he returns the exchange.

17.Re1+ Kd7 18.Qxf5+ Kc7 19.Re7+ Kb8

Moving in front of the pawns was no cure: 19...Kb6 20.Qc5+ Ka6 21.Qc4+ b5 22.Qxc6+ Qb6 23.Qe4 and White has too many threats.

analysis diagram







20.Qe5+ Kc8 21.Qe6+ Kb8 22.Bd6+ Black resigned

A Bishop sacrifice at f7... A Knight capture at e5... A King-hunt started with Qh5+... The game ended up Jerome-ish, after all.

And the funny thing about 11.Bxf7+ – it wasn't the strongest move on the board.

White's best was to take the e5 pawn for free with 11.Nxe5 and offer to sacrifice the Bishop a different way: if Black played 11...Nxc4, White's best would be 12.Nc6+!? winning Black's Queen.

Disdainful Defender Defense

There is something very strange about the Optical Illusion Variation of the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+). I am happy for the wins that it has brought me, even if it is probably more correctly termed the "Disdainful Defender Defense."

perrypawnpusher - mconst
blitz FICS, 2010

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

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6

7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 Qf6

This is a very reasonable defense. Black gives back one of his two extra pieces, and threatens to kill White's attack by trading Queens.

9.fxe5+ Qxe5 10.Qf3

A quick look at the updated New Year's Database shows that in the 15 games featuring the exchange of Queens, 10.Qxe5+, White won 8, lost 6 and drew 1, so maybe that move needs further investigation.

10...Nf6

Black develops a piece and strikes at White's center, forcing...

11.d3

11...Rf8

With a 4-to-1 lead in piece development (the King is a strong piece!) my opponent develops yet another piece, threatening an uncovered attack on my Queen... But he has missed something.

As pointed out "In The Beginning...", Alonzo Wheeler Jerome's first analysis of his gambit, appearing in the April 1874 issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal, noted of White's 11th move: "Compelling either K or Q to move as White threatens Bf4; or Black can play ...g5".

Sound advice.

12.Bf4 Qxf4 13.Qxf4+ Kc6

Black has two Bishops against White's Queen and extra pawn. Up until now, all of my opponents resigned quickly. Much to his credit, mconst decided to fight it out.

14.e5

Since I am likely to run into this position again, it is probably worth remembering that 14.Nc3 is stronger, possibly followed by Queenside castling. 

14...Nd5 15.Qe4 d6 16.c4

Even stronger was 16.Nc3

16...Bf5 17.Qxd5+ Kd7 18.Qxb7 Bxd3

19.exd6 Bxd6 20.Qb5+ Kc8

21.Qd5 Re8+ 22.Kd2 Rb8 23.Qxd3

White is now ahead a Queen – and I admit that I had grown impatient at my opponent's unwillingess to resign. This was a bad mental state for me to be in, as it gave extra force to Black's counter-attack...

23...Rxb2+ 24.Kd1

24...Rd8 25.Nd2 Bb4

26.Qf5+ Kb8 27.Qb5+ Ka8 28.Qc6+ Kb8 29.Qb5+

It was embarassing to consider forcing a draw while a Queen ahead... I calmed down enough return (a lot of) material to break the attack.

29...Ka8 30.Qxb4 Rxb4 31.Kc2

I was pretty sure that an extra piece would be enough...

31...Rb6 32.Rab1 Rbd6 33.Rhd1 Rh6 34.Nf3 Rf8 35.Rd7 Rc6 36.Kc3 a6

This mistake simplifies things.

37.Rxg7 Rf4 38.Nd2

38...Rf2 39.Rf1 Rxf1 40.Nxf1 Rf6 41.Ne3 Kb7

42.Rxh7 Black resigned

"The Worst Chess Opening Ever" – Warning or Menace??

 A number of months ago (see "The Worst Chess Opening Ever") I mentioned to readers that I had submitted an article on the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+), titled "The Worst Chess Opening Ever", to the United States Chess Federation's magazine Chess Life for Kids, which runs my regular "Arabian Knights" stories.

If the editor doesn't die laughing, I'll let you know if he accepts it for publication.

Let me assure you that Chess Life for Kids Editor Glenn Petersen is very much alive, and he has a great sense of humor.

So – the June 2010 issue of the magazine is out, and within its pages is the first part of my article.

Oh, yes, as it says

In Part 2 we will take a closer look and analyze the Jerome Gambit

Is exposing young chess-playing minds to such folly a good idea? Will it teach them bad habits and steer them away from studying the Catalan Opening? Or will they learn to crush such outrageous violations of chessic common sense?

Only time will tell...

Not again! (And Again)

Since the following Jerome Gambit game* (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) is identical to one that I played less than two weeks ago (see "(This time I saw it)"), I'm tempted to just copy the annotations from that game, or simply give a link to perrypawnpusher - thinan, blitz FICS, 2010.

Instead, I'll add a few diagrams, make a few references to the "Jerome Gamble" – How much of any of the refutations does my opponent actually know?? – and then let you get on your way.

perrypawnpusher  - javistas
blitz FICS, 2010

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

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6

7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 Qh4+

9.g3 Nf3+

10.Kd1 Qe7

11.Qd5 checkmate

(*Two weeks after I originally composed this post, I played the identical game perrypawnpusher - fortytwooz, blitz, FICS, 2010. When I thanked my opponent afterwards for the game, he cheerfully responded with a simple "lol". That's my third example of what might be called "The Buyer's Regret Variation.")

Navigating On One's Own

"There I was, minding my own business, playing a Jerome Gambit variant, when my opponent goes all 'creative' and gets himself a lost game... Worse yet, he dragged me along with him into the wilderness!"

perrypawnpusher - kfollstad
blitz FICS, 2010

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ 

The Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit, a version of the "modern" Jerome Gambit by transposition (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nc3 Nf6).

5...Kxf7 6.Nxe5+ Nxe5 7.d4

7...Nxe4

Okay...

I'm not sure if my opponent borrowed this idea from the "fork trick" that shows up in the Italian Four Knights Game – 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bc4 Nxe4 5.Nxe4 d5 – or if he just decided to throw some material back at me.

Objectively better was 7...Bd6 8.dxe5 Bxe5.

8.Nxe4

Too Jerome-ish was 8.Qh5+ g6 9.Qxe5 Nxc3 10.bxc3 Bd6 11.Qd5+ Kg7 12.0-0 c6 13.Qc4 b5 14.Qd3 Qf6 15.c4 bxc4 16.Qxc4 a5 17.Bb2 Ba6 18.Qb3 Bxf1 19.Kxf1 Rhe8 20.Qb7 Qe7 21.d5+ Kg8 22.Qb3 c5 23.Qc3 Be5 24.Qa3 Bxb2 25.Qxb2 Qe2+ 26.Kg1 Qe1+ 27.Rxe1 Rxe1 checkmate, yorgos - jkpasanen, FICS, 2009.

8...Qh4

A better move was 8...Bxd4 as in 9.Qxd4 d6 10.f4 Nc6 11.Qd5+ Be6 12.Ng5+ Qxg5 13.Qxe6+ Kxe6 14.fxg5 Kd7 15.0-0 Rhf8 16.Bf4 Nd4 17.c3 Ne2+ 18.Kh1 Nxf4 19.g3 Nd3 20.Kg2 Nxb2 21.Rab1 Nd3 22.Rxb7 Rxf1 23.Kxf1 Rf8+ 24.Ke2 Nc5 25.Rxa7 h5 26.a4 Rf5 27.h4 Kc8 28.Ra5 Kb7 29.Rb5+ Kc6 30.Rb4 Re5+ 31.Kf3 g6 32.Kf4 Rf5+ 33.Ke3 Na6 34.Rc4+ Rc5 35.Re4 Rxc3+ 36.Kd4 Ra3 37.Re6 Rxa4+ 38.Ke3 Nc5 39.Rxg6 Re4+ 40.Kf2 Rg4 41.Rh6 Ne4+ 42.Kf3 Kd5 43.Rxh5 c6 44.Kxg4 Nf2+ 45.Kf3 Black resigned, yorgos - josephjorkens, FICS, 2009.

9.Nxc5

The other capture of the Bishop led to disaster: 9.dxc5 Qxe4+ 10.Kf1 Qc4+ 11.Kg1 Qxc5 12.Qf3+ White resigned, Alby - asalamon, FICS, 2000.

9...Re8 10.dxe5

A move made with no more thought than "Yippie! I get another piece!"

Simply castling was safer and smarter.

10...Rxe5+ 11.Be3

Guarding the Knight, but leaving the Bishop unguarded. Instead, 11.Kf1 Rxc5 gave White an even game – the best that I could hope for at this point.

11...Rxe3+ 12.Kf1 Re5 13.Nd3 Rf5

Black has the edge now, due to better development and a Bishop vs White's Knight. I guess kfollstad's creativity worked for him, after all.

14.Qe2

I was amused to see after the game that Rybka suggested further castling-by-hand for White: 14.h3 d6 15.Kg1 Be6 16.Kh2.

14...d6 15.Re1 Bd7

16.g3 Qd4

Too cooperative: 16...Qh3+ kept the advantage for Black.

17.Qe7+ Kg6 18.Qxd7

18...Raf8 19.Qe6+ Kh5

20.Nf4+ Rxf4 21.gxf4 Rxf4 22.Qh3+ Kg5 23.Rg1+ Rg4 24.Qxg4+ Black resigned

It takes all kinds...

Wandering through the updated New Year's Database of Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+), Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4 4.Bxf7+), and Semi-Italian Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.0-0/4.Nc3/4.d3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+) games, I stumbled across two players with similar names: GriffySr and GriffyJr.

They had played games from 2001 to 2010, and had FICS  ratings as high as 2366 and 2136 respectively.

Heavy hitters!

The Griffys' score with White was a blistering 99%: 33 wins, no losses, one draw (in a winning position). Their score with Black was nearly as good: 90%, from 26 wins and 3 losses.

Most of their games with White were attacks against the Semi-Italian Opening (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6), and they defended brutally against the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) – some games were of theoretical interest.

I guess I wasn't too surprised when I looked into the players a bit deeper, and read

GriffyJr and GriffySr are identical Crafty binaries with hardwired search depth.

I'd already discovered GFcrafty to be a silicon-based member of the Jerome Gambit Gemeinde, too.

Well, as they say, "It takes all kinds..."