Intrigued by yesterday's Jerome Gambit Declined (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kf8/Ke7) game (see "Tumbling Dice"), I thought I'd take a look at the line in The Database and see what up-to-date data I could drum up.
I was surprised to see that White, ahead a pawn and having prevented Black from castling, only scores 58% in 238 games. Admittedly, that's better for White than the straight Jerome Gambit line – 44% in 8,737 games – but it still seems light.
(Perhaps one must take into account the level of play, and Geoff Chandler's "blunder table".)
Breaking it down was not much help.
In 205 games, when Black declined the Bishop sacrifice with 5...Kf8, White scored 57%. Immediately removing the White Bishop from danger or exchanging it off – what would appear to be the simplest and best plan for the first player – did not matter a whole lot. In 51 games White played 6.Bxg8, scoring 63%. This was better than the 25 games in which White played 6.Bb3, scoring 56%; and the 18 games where White played 6.Bc4, scoring 53%. However, only one of those percentages is an improvement on the core 57%.
(We seem to have hit another one of those Jerome Gambit anomalies: by playing a "worse" line, White, apparently, scores "better" – or at least not any worse.)
In the 33 games where Black played 5...Ke7, however, White scored 71%. That should be an indication for Black – although accepting the Bishop with 4...Kxf7 remains the best idea.
I was looking for a recent example of the Jerome Gambit Declined, a rather rare beast, when I ran across a game by an upstanding member of the Jerome Gambit Gemeinde, HauntedKnight.
The following game, however, takes on the look of some tumbling dice, as the fortunes of both players change widely. However, as we have seen recently ("Wonderland"), White's "secret weapon" (i.e. it can take time for Black to figure what is going on in the Jerome, and how to play against it) finally snatches victory from the jaws of defeat. Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha!
Congrats, HK, a win is a win.
HauntedKnight - Merfis
blitz, FICS, 2012
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kf8 5.Bb3 Nf6 6.d3 h6 7.0-0 Na5 8.Nxe5 Nxb3 9.Ng6+ Kf7 10.Nxh8+ Kg8 11.Ng6 Nxa1 12.Be3 Qe8 13.Nf4 Bxe3 14.fxe3 Qe5 15.Nc3 Nxc2 16.Qxc2 c6 17.Ng6 Qe8 18.Nh4 d5 19.Qb3 Kh7 20.Re1 dxe4 21.dxe4 Nxe4 22.Nxe4 Qxe4 23.Nf3 b6 24.Qf7 c5 25.h4 Be6 26.Qc7 Bxa2 27.h5 Qg4 28.Ne5 Qxh5 29.Rf1 Bd5 30.Nd7 Qe2 31.Nf6+ Kh8 32.Nxd5 Qxb2 33.Qb7 Rd8 34.Nf4 Qa3 35.Ne6 Qxe3+ 36.Kh1 Qxe6 37.Qxa7 c4 38.Qc7 Rc8 39.Qg3 c3 40.Re1 Qf6 41.Qg4 Rd8 42.Qh5 c2 43.Re8+ Rxe8 44.Qxe8+ Kh7 45.Qe4+ Qg6 46.Qe3 b5 47.Qc1 Black forfeited on time
Sometimes a defender, having wandered into the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+), feels out of place, as things are not quite what was expected, as if it's a trip to Wonderland...
perrypawnpusher - anelante
blitz, FICS, 2012
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Ke7
The earliest example I have of this move (which might as well be called the "buyer's regret" variation) in The Database (with the addition of my game, White has scored 89% in 23 games) is SirOops - mentalGIANT, standard, FICS, 2001 (1-0, 25); although it certainly must have been played over-the-board earlier.
8.Qxe5+ Kf7 9.Qxc5
Surprisingly, I missed playing my usual "nudge" 9.Qd5+, driving the King to the back line to interfere with the Rook.
9...Nf6 10.Nc3 d6
White is up two pawns, and it is hard to see Black's compensation.
11.Qe3
Probably not best, given that it leaves White's Queen and King on the same file that Black's Rook can quickly go to. Nothing bad happens, as a result, but this reinforces the point that White should have "nudged" when he had the chance.
11...Rf8
Black prudently castles-by-hand. After the game Rybka suggested the wild 11...d5 12.Qf4 g5!? 13.Qg3 (13.Qxg5 Rg8 14.Qf4 Rg4 15.Qe5 dxe4 16.0-0) 13...dxe4 to reduce White's advantage.
12.0-0 Kg8 13.d4 b6 14.f4 Bb7 15.e5 Re8
16.Qd3 Ng4 17.Qg3
Or 17.h3 as Rybka later suggested.
17...Bc8 18.f5 dxe5 19.Qxg4 exd4
20.Bh6
Missing the better 20.Ne4
20...Qf6 21.Bg5 Qc6 22.Nd1 Black forfeited on time
If there are already adequate ways to deal with Black's audacious 3...Nd4, the Blackburne Shilling Gambit, why should White bother to introduce a Jerome Gambit theme? As the following game illustrates, a few small errors on Black's part can quickly add up to a hopeless game.
sahistonline - BDJ
standard, FICS, 2012
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4
The Blackburne Shilling Gambit.
4.Bxf7+
The Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit.
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Ke8 6.c3
An interesting alternative to the direct 6.Qh5+. Black's response, instead of just retreating his Knight (6...Ne6), causes trouble for the defense.
6...Bd6 7.cxd4 Bxe5 8.Qh5+
The move still has bite. Black's best response is to shift his King to f8.
8...g6 9.Qxe5+ Qe7 10.Qxh8 Qxe4+ 11.Kf1 Kf7 12.Nc3 d6 Black resigned
In the following game I had the typical Jerome Gambit extra pawns vs extra piece imbalance. As my time ran short, I think my opponent tried to push things a bit, and it was then, as he focused upon his own ideas, that my opportunity appeared.
perrypawnpusher - trmii
blitz, FICS, 2012
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6
The Semi-Italian opening.
4.O-O Bc5 5.Bxf7+
The Semi-Italian Jerome Gambit.
5...Kxf7 6.Nxe5+ Nxe5 7.Qh5+ Ng6 8.Qd5+ Ke8 9.Qxc5 d6 10.Qe3
10...Ne5 11.f4
Slightly better might be 11.d4, as in perrypawnpusher - Kotimatka, blitz, FICS, 2009 (1-0, 21) and perrypawnpusher - Eferio, blitz, FICS, 2011 (1-0, 24).
11...Nc4 12.Qd4 b5 13.Qxg7 Qf6 14.Qxc7 Ne7
White has 4 "extra" pawns for the sacrificed piece, but I was uncomfortable with my Queen's cramped quarters, so I decided to give one back immediately. I could have tried 15.d3, instead.
15.e5 Qe6 16.exd6 Qxd6 17.Qxd6 Nxd6 18.Nc3 Bb7 19.d3 Rg8
The Queens are off the board, but Black has a nice attacking idea on the Kingside.
20.Rf2 Nef5 21.Bd2 Nh4 22.Re1+ Kd7 23.Ne4 Nxe4 24.dxe4 Rae8 25. g3 Ng6
26.Rfe2 Ba6 27.Bb4 Bb7 28.Rd2+ Kc7 29.e5 Ne7 30.Bxe7 Rxe7 31.Red1 Bc6
I am sure that my central "Jerome pawns" could advance and act spear-like, but I was a bit short of calculating time and decided to use the pawns as a shield instead. My opponent seemed to be moving quickly now, as if he wanted to take advantage of my time pressure.
32.Kf2 a5 33.Rd6 Rh8 34.R1d3 h5
Attacking the "shield" but overlooking the idea behind my last move.
35.Rc3 Rd8 36.Rcxc6+ Kb7 37.Rxd8 Kxc6 38.Rd6+ Kc5 39.Rh6
39...Kd4 40.Rxh5 b4 41.Ke2 a4 42.Rh6 b3 43.c3+ Kc5 44.a3 Black resigned
I was going to quietly slip the following embarrassing game into The Database and make no passing mention of it, treating it simply as a symptom of sleep deprivation; but in the follow-up game my opponent took the White pieces, played a gambit, and won my Queen again – and I thought that it was only fair to acknowledge karleinkarl's fighting play.
perrypawnpusher - karleinkarl
blitz, FICS, 2012
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 9.fxe5+ Qxe5 10.Qf3 Nf6 11.d3
In the past I have referred to this (and similar) lines as an "optical illusion variation", as at least 7 times my opponents have allowed me to subsequently pin their Queen to their King. Strange, but true.
11...Ke7
My opponent does not fall for the "trap"; but, don't go away – there's one more laugh ahead.
12.Nc3 Bd4 13.Bf4
Simply 13.Bd2, followed by 14.0-0-0, as in mrjoker - CEF, blitz, ICC, 2008 (1-0, 24) was the smart way to continue.
13...Bxc3+ 14.Ke2 Qh5 15.bxc3 d6
16.Rab1
Obviously the victim of an "optical illusion" – or something.
16...Bg4 White resigned
My opponent, a good sport, did not tease me. He has had his own "mysterious" games.
