The following 3-minute game is packed with excitement. White's attack crashes through, and Black's "safe" King is the victim.
I will keep my notes light, but the players keep the mood heavy - a battle to the bitter end.
joniko - Rolandia
lichess.org, 2016
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 7.Qd5+
The "nudge", suggesting that White is familiar with the Jerome Gambit, and,
perhaps, this blog.
7...Ke8 8.Qxc5 d6 9.Qc4
Jerome - Brownson, Iowa, 1875 (1-0,
28) continued 9.Qc3.
9...Nf6 10.O-O Qe7
11.f4 Nd7 12.d3
Nb6 13.Qb3 Rf8 14.Nc3 Be6 15.Qb4 Kd7
16.f5 Bxf5
An interesting idea, returning material, but probably 16...Bg8 was better. Black clearly intends to move his King to the Queenside and attack on the Kingside. As this plan develops, White avoids f5-f6, not wanting to open things up against his own King.
17.exf5 Ne5 18.Ne4 Rae8 19.Qd4 Kc8 20.Bg5 Qd7 21.a4 Kb8 22.a5 Na8
23. a6
b6 24.Qd5 c6 25.Qb3
25.Qxd6+ was possible, e.g. 25...Nc7 (if 25...Qxd6 then 26.Nxd6 and Black's Rooks are uncomfortable)
26.d4.
25...Nc7 26.d4 Nf7 27.Nc5
Flashy, but with time disappearing on both clocks, very tempting.
27...dxc5 28.dxc5 b5
Instead, 28...Qd4+ 29.Kh1 Nxg5 30.cxb6 Qxb6 defends.
29.Bf4 g5
30.Rad1 Qc8 31.Bd6 Nxd6 32.cxd6 Nd5
Black's last chance was 32...Rxf5 33.dxc7+ Kxc7 with about an equal game.
33.Rxd5 cxd5
Now White has a forced checkmate.
34.Qxb5+ Ka8 35.d7 Qb8 36.Qxd5+ Qb7 37.Qxb7 checkmate
?
I was looking in The Database for something light to share with Readers, and came across the following game. I am not quite sure what to make of it, except it is another example of the error of "if you sacrifice a piece on f7, I will sacrifice one on f2" thinking in the Jerome Gambit.
Technically, the game isn't even a Jerome Gambit... I need to expand upon my musings in the note to move 4.
Wall, Bill - Rube
PlayChess.com, 2013
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Na6
Already I am not sure what to say. Is Bill's opponent a chess-playing program?
3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
Why not? The "Jerome Solution" is often a fun way to deal with surprises.
4...Kf8
With a Knight on c6 (instead of a6) The Database shows White scoring 55% against this declination, which I find very odd, especially in light of the fact that The Database statistic for the Jerome Gambit offered - 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ - is White scoring 45%. This suggests that when White moves from offering a piece (or two) for a pawn (or two) to accepting a pawn, he only improves his scoring chances 10%.
5.Bc4 Bxf2+
Returning the psychological "shock" - but, here, White takes the piece.
6.Kxf2 c6 7.Nxe5 d6 8.Nf7 Qf6+ 9.Qf3 Qxf3+ 10.gxf3 Nc5 11.Nxh8
Black resigned
'Tis a puzzlement.
!?!?
While the Jerome Gambit might, on the surface, appear to be a "simple" chess opening - so brutal as to be completely transparent - it can have its little surprises, which is part of what makes it attractive. Take the following game...
procyk - deriver69
Jerome Gambit Tournament, RedHotPawn.com, 2016
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
4...Kxf7 5.c3 Nf6 6.O-O d6 7.d4 exd4 8.cxd4 Bb6 9.Qb3+ Ke7
It is interesting that Stockfish 7 prefers 9...d5 here, while a couple of other computers in game situations preferred 9...Kf8, e.g. 10.Qd3 (10.d5 Ne5 11.Nxe5 dxe5 12.Nc3 Ng4 13.h3 Bxf2+ 14.Rxf2+ Nxf2 15.Kxf2 Qh4+ 16.Kg1 Qg3 17.Nb5 Qxb3 18.axb3 c6 19.Nc7 Rb8 20.Be3 Bd7 21.Bxa7 Rd8 22.Rf1+ Kg8 23.Bc5 cxd5 24.exd5 h6 25.Re1 Rc8 26.d6 Rh7 27.b4 g6 28.Nd5 Rf8 29.Rxe5 Rhf7 30.Re1 Re8 31.Ne7+ Kh7 32.Ra1 Ref8 33.b3 Rf4 34.Ra7 Rb8 35.Bb6 Rf7 36.Bc7 Rbf8 37.Rxb7 Bxh3 38.Bb6 Bc8 39.Ra7 Be6 40.d7 Rf1+ 41.Kh2 Rd1 42.d8=Q Rdxd8 43.Bxd8 Rxd8 44.b5 Rd3 45.Nc6+ Kg8 46.b6 Rxb3 47.b7 Bc4 48.b8=Q+ Rxb8 49.Nxb8 Be6 50.Nc6 h5 51.Kg3 Kf8 52.Kf4 Bd5 53.Ne5 Bxg2 54.Nxg6+ Ke8 55.Kg5 Bf3 56.Nf4 Kd8 57.Nxh5 Kc8 58.Rg7 Be4 59.Kf4 Bc6 60.Ke5 Bf3 61.Nf4 Bc6 62.Ne6 Kb8 63.Kd6 Be4 64.Nd4 Kc8 65.Rc7+ Kb8 Black resigned, Rybka 2.3.2a - DrunkenMaster 1.2, 2009) 10...Qe7 11.Nc3 Bg4 12.Be3 Nb4 13.Qd2 Bxf3 14.gxf3 Kg8 15.Na4 Nc6 16.Rac1 Qf7 17.b4 Qg6+ 18.Kh1 Qh5 19.Qd1 Rc8 20.Nxb6 axb6 21.Rg1 Nxb4 22.Qb3+ Kf8 23.Qxb4 Qxf3+ 24.Rg2 Qxe4 25.Bg5 Qd5 26.Bxf6 gxf6 27.Qd2 h5 28.Qf4 f5 29.f3 Rh7 30.Rg6 Ra8 31.Rf6+ Ke8 32.Rxf5 Qg8 33.Qe4+ Kd8 34.Qxb7 Rc8 35.Rf6 Ke7 36.Rf4 Kd8 37.Re4 Qf7 38.f4 Rg7 39.Rce1 Rg8 40.Qc6 Qd7 41.Qd5 Qg4 42.Re7 Qg6 43.Qc6 Qg1+ 44.Rxg1 Rxg1+ 45.Kxg1 Kxe7 46.f5 Kf6 47.Qg2 Re8 48.Qg6+ Ke7 49.Qg7+ Kd8 50.f6 Kc8 51.f7 Black resigned, SOS 5.1 - DrunkenMaster, 2009.
In any event, Black appears to be doing well, having an extra piece for the cost of a pawn. True, his King has not found safety, but isn't that a trivial thing?
7.Bg5
White pins the Knight, setting up a hit on it with the e-pawn. It turns out that he can make the advance right away: 7.e5 dxe5 8.dxe5 Ne4 9.Ng5!? Here's a shocker; White recovers his piece. Stockfish 7 recommends 9...Qg8 10.Qxg8 Rxg8 11.Nxe4 h6 and White has a small edge.
7...Bg4 8.e5 dxe5
9.Nxe5
Deviating from the foretold 9.dxe5. Maybe he can still get a pawn to e5?
9...Nxe5
Black believes he has an antidote to all the mischief regarding the e5 pawn's attack on the pinned Knight at f6, but he should have played it - 9...Be6 - right away, as after 10.Nxc6+ bxc6 11.Re1 Qd6 he would be doing fine.
10.dxe5 Be6 11.exf6+ gxf6 12.Qa3+ Kf7
White has recovered his piece, and Black's King remains slightly exposed. If the first player can safeguard his Bishop, he should be able to keep the game level.
13.Bh4
This looks fine, but Stockfish 7 recommends the pin, 13.Qf3, instead, i.e. 13...Qd4 14.Nd2 Bg4 15.Qb3+ Be6 16.Qf3 and an invitation to draw by repetition. Existential anxiety?
13...Rg8
This proves to be the winning idea, but the computer prefers 13...Qd4 14.Bg3 h5 15.Qc3 h4 16.Qxd4 Bxd4 17.Bxc7 Bxb2 18.Nd2 Bxa1 19.Rxa1 Bd5 when Black is clearly better.
14.Nc3 Bd4 15.Ne2 Qd5 16.Rad1
Suddenly realizing that he had overlooked something, here White resigned
The first thing that comes to mind at the mention of the Jerome Gambit is not "positional play". Yet, in the following game Bill Wall works to delay the development of Black's light-squared Bishop (a state of affairs that is often deadly for the second player) even at the cost of trading Queens.
Wall, Bill- NN
lichess.org, 2016
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. Bxf7+
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.d4 Bxd4 7.Qxd4
Qf6
With both defense and a trap in mind.
8.Qc5 Qd6 9.Qxd6
Black's Bishop will not be travelling on the c8-h3 diagonal.
For 9.Qc3 see Wall, B - Guest3967134, PlayChess.com, 2015. Also 8.Qe3 as in Wall,B - Tsyalex, PlayChess.com, 2015 (1-0, 20); and 8.Qd1 as seen in an unfinished correspondence game Jerome,A - Norton, D.P., 1876, and the later Jerome,A - Jaeger,D, correspondence, 1879, (1-0, 35).
Don't overlook "Why Did He Play That Move?"
9...cxd6 10.Bf4
The alternative, 10.O-O, was seen in Wall,B - berserkergang, FICS, 2011,
(1-0, 21).
10...Nf6 11.Nc3 b6 12.O-O-O Ke6 13.Nb5
13...Nxe4
Black protects the pawn at d6, but not the space at c7. Perhaps he has his eyes on his own fork at f2.
14.Nc7+ Ke7 15.Nxa8 Nxf2 16.Bg5+ Kf7
Not as good is 16...Ke6, i.e. 17.Rhf1 Ned3+ (not 17...Nxd1 18.Nc7#) 18.cxd3 Nxd1 19.Nc7+ Ke5 20.Kxd1 Bb7. Black's Bishop is finally developed, but he is worse.
Black continues, but his oversight on move 21 seals the game.
17.Rhf1 Kg6 18.Rxf2 Kxg5 19.Nc7 Bb7 20.Nb5 a6 21.Nxd6
Be4 22.Nxe4+ Black resigned
The following game is from the second round of the RedHotPawn.com Jerome Gambit tournament. Despite good effort in a difficult variation, White is not able to pry away the full point.
kristjan - procyk
RedHotPawn, 2016
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.d3 h6
The game has transposed to a Semi-Italian Jerome Gambit line where White temporized with d2-d3, i.e. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.d3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ Kxf7.
White now decides on the "classical" second piece sacrifice. It is interesting to note that a first round game, deriver69 - procyk, transposed into the continuation 6.0-0 (0-1, 25).
6.Nxe5+ Nxe5 7.Qh5+ Ke6
Alternatives include:
7...g6 8.Qxe5 Be7 9.Qxh8 Bf6 10.Qh7+ Bg7 11.e5 d6 12.f4 Bf5 13.Nc3 Nf6 14.exf6 Qxf6 15.O-O c6 16.g4 Rh8 17.Qxh8 Bxh8 18.gxf5 gxf5 19.Be3 b5 20.Bxa7 h5 21.Be3 h4 22.a4 d5 23.d4 b4 24.Ne2 Qg6+ 25.Kf2 c5 26.a5 c4 27.a6 h3 28.a7 Qg2+ 29.Ke1 Black resigned, Wall,B - Riichmarj, Chess.com, 2010;
7...Ng6 8. Qxc5 (8.Qd5+ Ke8 9.Qxc5 N8e7 10.f4 Rf8 11.O-O d6 12.Qh5 Kd7 13.Nc3 c6 14.Be3 Kc7 15.b4 Bd7 16.b5 cxb5 17.Nxb5+ Bxb5 18.Qxb5 a6 19.Qb2 Nc6 20.Bb6+ Kb8 21.Bxd8 Black resigned, Wall,B - Ashley, Chess.com, 2010) 8...d6 9.Qe3 Nf6 10.h3 (10.O-O Rf8 11.Nc3 Kg8 12.b4 Ng4 13.Qd4 N6e5 14.Qd5+ Kh8 15.f3 Qh4 16.fxg4 Rxf1+ 17.Kxf1 Qxh2 18.Bb2 Bxg4 19.Ke1 Qg1+ 20.Kd2 Qxg2+ 21.Kc1 Qf1+ 22.Kd2 Nf3+ 23.Ke3 Qh3 24.Qxb7 Ne5+ 25.Kd4 c5+ 26.bxc5 dxc5+ 27.Kxe5 Qh5+ 28.Kd6 Rd8+ 29.Kc6 Rc8+ 30.Kb5 c4+ 31.Kb4 Qe5 32.Rb1 Rb8 33.Nb5 Qxb2+ 34.Rxb2 Rxb7 35.Kxc4 a6 36.a4 axb5+ 37.axb5 White resigned, DREWBEAR 63 - TWODOGS, JGTourney4, ChessWorld, 2009) 10...Bd7 11.Bd2 Bc6 12.Nc3 Rf8 13.O-O-O Kg8 14.f4 Nd7 15.g4 Nxf4 16.Qd4 Ne6 17.Qg1 Ng5 18.h4 Nf3 19.Qg3 Nxd2 20.Rxd2 Ne5 21.Ne2 Rf3 22.Qg2 Qe7 23.Nd4 Rf4 24.g5 Rg4 25.Qe2 hxg5 26.hxg5 Qxg5 27.Qh2 Kf7 28.Rf1+ Ke7 29.Nf5+ Kd7 30.Nd4 a5 31.b3 a4 32.b4 b6 33.Rf5 Qe3 34.Nxc6 Kxc6 35.Kb2 a3+ 36.Kb3 Qd4 37.c3 Qe3 38.Rdf2 Qxd3 39.Rd2 Qc4+ White resigned, ZahariSokolov - laspac, FICS, 2014.
8.Qf5+ Kd6 9.Nc3
Development is a good thing in a gambit, but White might have had more luck with 9.f4. There are only two games with that move in The Database, but White won both.
9...c6
Black also succeeded with 9...a6 10.Bf4 Qf6 11.Bxe5+ Qxe5 12.Qf8+ Kc6 13.f4 Qxc3+ White resigned, jibeng - ehvmc, FICS, 2010.
10.Bf4
Again White goes with develoment. Seen elsewhere was 10.f4 Qf6 11.fxe5+ Qxe5 12.Bf4 Bd4 13.Bxe5+ Bxe5 14.O-O Nf6 15.Rad1 Ke7 16.d4 d6 17.Qg6 Bxh2+ 18.Kxh2 Be6 19.e5 dxe5 20.dxe5 Bf7 21.exf6+ gxf6 22.Qe4+ Kf8 23.Rxf6 Re8 24.Rxf7+ Kxf7 25.Rd7+ Kf6 26.Qh4+ Ke6 27.Rxb7 a6 28.Qc4+ Kd6 29.Qxa6 Rc8 30.Ne4+ Kd5 31.Qd3+ Ke5 32.g3 Rcd8 33.Re7+ Kf5 34.Qf3+ Kg6 35.Qf7 checkmate, ZahariSokolov - mmamaju, FICS, 2014
10...Qf6
11.Bxe5+
Likely better was 11.O-O-O, although the position would still be difficult.
11...Qxe5 12.Qf3 Nf6 13.O-O-O Bd4 White resigned
The ending comes abruptly, but White may have decided that he simply did not have enough compensation for his two pieces. It will take some work to get any kind of attack on the King going.
This previous post is worth repeating
for those who may have missed it.
I mean, how often do you see "balderdash in the highest sense"
to describe a chess opening?
Grandmaster Jon Speelman's "Agony Column" at the ChessBase news site presents games submitted by average players. Each week he shows one player's "agony" game, where the outcome was not a happy one; and the same player's "ecstacy" game, where the result was more enjoyable.
GM Speelman's analysis is, as always, instructive, enlightening, fair and enjoyable.
This week he takes a look at two of my Jerome Gambit games.
Wow. "And lived to tell the tale", as they say.
Be sure to stop by the site and read the column! Be sure to check out the "Discuss"comments as well.
In the following game, Black's defensive ideas are interesting, but don't quite work. Part of the reason is that he is playing against Bill Wall, but part of the reason is that he is facing the dynamic Jerome Gambit.
Wall, Bill - Shillam
lichess.org, 2016
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.d4 Bb6
Black saves his Bishop and gives up his Knight. In 109 games in The Database, White scores 50%.
7.dxe5 Qh4
Bill faced the more conservative 7...Qe7 in Wall, B, - NN, lichess.org, 2016: 8.Qf3+ Ke8 9.Nc3 Qxe5 10.O-O Nf6 11.Bf4 Qh5 12.Qg3 d6 13.Qxg7 Rf8 14.Nd5 Qf7 15.Bh6 Nxd5 16.Qxf8+ Qxf8 17.Bxf8 Kxf8 18.exd5 Bf5 19.c3 Re8 20.Rfe1 Be4 21.Rad1 Kf7 22.Kf1 Re5 23.f3 Bg6 24.Rxe5 dxe5 25.Ke2 e4 26.b4 exf3+ 27.Kxf3 Bh5+ 28.g4 Bg6 29.c4 a6 30.d6 cxd6 31.Rxd6 Bb1 32.Rxb6 Bxa2 33.Rxb7+ Ke6 34.Rb6+ Kd7 35.c5 Black resigned.
8.Qf3+ Ke8 9.Nc3 Bxf2+
An interesting, if eventually flawed idea: Black returns a piece, leaving White with a couple of possibly weak isolated pawns. It turns out that the second player does not have a draw in hand.
10.Qxf2 Qxf2+ 11.Kxf2 Nh6 12.Nd5 Ng4+ 13.Kg3 Kd8 14.Bg5+ Nf6 15.exf6 h6 16.fxg7+ Ke8 17.gxh8=Q+ Kf7 18.Rhf1+ Kg6 19.Qxh6 checkmate
