I just won my latest Jerome Gambit game, in the "Italian Game Classic" tournament at Chess.com. I am still trying to figure out how I did it.
Since my opponent and I entered what I call the "Optical Illusion" variation of the Jerome Gambit - see "Optical Illusion (1)", "Optical Illusion (2)" and "Disdainful Defender Defense" - I am inclined to see my last move in the game as giving a false impression of strength, another illusion.
This was a fortunate outcome for me, to a game that started off with ominous tones. Ever since I started posting on this blog, over a decade ago, I have worried (mostly, needlessly) that an opponent might simply come here and look up a line of play or refutation and throw it at me.
The fact is, you could get a good sense of my game by simply looking at my post on perrypawnpusher - PDX84, Italian Game Classic, Chess.com, 2019 (1-0, 15), and its notes, through move 12, as recounted less than 2 weeks ago in "Jerome Gambit: History in Play".
Really. Go read the post. It contains some good analysis and a good amount of Jerome Gambit history.
(For that matter, you could wander on back 6 years to "Who's the 'Expert'?", which contained perrypawnpusher - vz721, Italian Game thematic, Chess.com, 2013 (0-1, 29), which anticipated the current game through move 13. We will get back to that.)
Still, I don't want to give a bare game score, today. Since I had so much fun sharing the analysis of an earlier game that the Chess.com computer provided (see "Jerome Gambit: A Way Out of the Woods [Part 1 and 2]) I decided to consult that oracle again, and share its conclusions. I dipped into The Database a bit, too.
perrypawnpusher - schnappa
Italian Game Classic, Chess.com, 2019
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+
The Chess.com computer post-game analysis rated this move as "excellent", but still considered 6.d4 to be "best".
As I wrote in "Jerome Gambit: A Way Out of the Woods (Part 1)",
For the record, The Database has 4,442 games with 6.Qh5+ (White scores 56%) and 2,024 games with 6.d4 (White scores 55%). So, 6.Qh5+ is twice as popular as 6.d4, but both moves score similarly.
6...Ke6
"Best" according to the Chess.com analyst.
7.Qf5+
This move was "good", while 7.f4 was "best".
The Database shows my clear preference for 7.Qf5+: I have 80 games with the move, scoring 86%. As for 7.f4, I have 2 games - although I did win both of them (see "Jerome Gambit: Unfinished Symphony Part 1 and 2" and "Return of the Negative Halo Effect in the Jerome Gambit").
7...Kd6 8.f4
"best" according to the computer. It was first suggested in Jerome's analysis in the "New Chess Opening" article in the April 1874 issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal.
8...Qf6
This was an "inaccuracy" according to the Chess.com post game analysis. Instead, 8...Kc6 was seen as "best".
This evaluation is mildly supported by The Database, that has 75 games with the natural move 8...Qf6, with White scoring 53%; while it has only 3 games with 8...Kc6, although Black won them all.
(It is interesting that this main line shows up in "Jerome Gambit Secrets #5", which takes a look at the relatively unknown 8...Ne7: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 Ne7 - although the "secret" comes a couple of moves later).
9.fxe5+
The computer analysis saw this move as "excellent", although it considered exchanging Queens with 9.Qxe5+, as "best".
9...Qxe5 10.Qf3
Of course, the Chess.com engine considered this move as an "inaccuracy", because swapping Queens with 10.Qxe5 would have been "best"
10...Nf6
I my notes to perrypawnpusher - PDX84, I said that this move made a lot of sense. The Chess.com analysis referred to it as "best"
[to be continued]
Sometimes you can meet an expected offbeat opening (e.g. the Jerome Gambit) with another offbeat opening (e.g. the Blackburne Shilling Gambit) and morph into an offbeat line (e.g. the Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit) - all of which can be rationally calculated, if the clock allows you.
Alas, for Black, in the following game, that does not happen.
angelcamina - shahramkhoshseffat
1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2019
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4
The Blackburne Shilling Gambit.
4.Bxf7+
The Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit. According to The Database, angelcamina is 9-0 with this line in bullet chess.
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Ke8 6.Qh5+
6...g6
Otherwise, White can checkmate, e.g. 6...Ke7 7.Qf7+ Kd6 8.Nc4+ Kc6 9.Qd5 checkmate, angelcamina - umutkaraca09, lichess.org, 2019.
7.Nxg6 hxg6
The alternative, 7...Nxc2+, should only lead to an even game, although angelcamina wrestled a win, e.g. 8.Kd1 Nxa1? 9.Nxh8+ Ke7 10.Qf7+ [10.Qe5#] Kd6 11.d4 [11.Qd5+ Ke7 12.Qe5#] Kc6 12.Qd5+ Kb6 13.Nc3 c6 14.Qb3+? Kc7? 15.Bf4+ d6 16.Qf7+ Ne7 17.e5 d5 18.e6+ Kb6 19.Na4+ Ka5 20.b3 b5 21.Bd2+ Ka6 22.Nc5+ Kb6 23.Qf4 Ng6 24.Qe3 Nxh8 25.Qc3 Bxc5 26.Qa5+ Kb7 27.Qxd8 Bb6 28.Qe7+ Ka6 29.Qxh7 Bb7 30.e7 Black resigned, angelcamina - eloali, 1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2019.
Likewise, 7...Nf6 led to trouble, 8.Qe5+ Ne6 9.Nxh8 Bg7 10.Qf5 Bxh8 11.e5 Nd5 12.Qxh7 Bxe5 13.Qg8+ Nf8 14.f4 Nxf4 15.O-O Ne2+ 16.Kh1 Qe7 17.d4 Bxd4 18.Bg5 Ng3+ 19.hxg3 White won on time, angelcamina - Skhokho1507, 1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2019.
And 7...Qf6 fared no better, e.g. 8.Nxh8+ Ke7 9.e5 Nxc2+ 10.Kd1 Qxf2 11.Qf7+ Kd8 12.Qxf2 Black resigned, angelcamina - felix_paton, 1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2019.
8.Qxh8 Nf6
Not 8...Ke7 9.Qxd4 Ke8 10.O-O Be7 11.f4 Nf6 12.e5 Ng4 13.f5 b6 14.Qxg4 gxf5 15.Qg6+ Kf8 16.Rxf5+ Bf6 17.Rxf6+ Ke7 18.Rf7+ Ke8 19.Qg8 checkmate, angelcamina - aldiardiansyah, 1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2019.
Now was the time for 8...Nxc2+, with advantage to Black. In the BSJG it can be hard to tell if the Rook on a1 is poisoned or not.
9.Kd1 d5 10.e5
This is a slip, and in bullet games with a time control of one minute, no increment, they can be expected. Black now also misses the fact that 10...Ne4 would be crushing.
10...Nd7 11.c3 Nc6
12.e6 Nf6 13.Re1 Qe7 14.d3 b6
It would have been okay to grab the pawn with 14...Bxe6, but that would have taken some thinking time, and bullet games are notoriously short of that. Now White closes in.
15.Bg5 Bb7 16.Bxf6 Qd6 17.e7
Those pesky "Jerome pawns"!
17...Nxe7 18.Bxe7 Qxe7 19.Rxe7+ Kxe7
20.Qe5+ Kd7 21.Kc2 Bd6 22.Qg7+ Kc6 23.Nd2 d4 24.cxd4 Rf8 25.f3 Rf5 26.Ne4 Rd5 27.Nxd6 Rxd6 28.Rc1 Ba6 29.Kd2+ Kb7 30.Qxc7+ White won on time
In the "good old days" of chess, it was considered valiant to offer sacrifices, and craven to refuse them. These attitudes produced some very entertaining games - and a plethora of virtual tut tuts from the computers that came after, and supplied skeptical analysis.
The world of "bullet chess" - in this case, a time limit of one minute with no increment - has brought back wild play, and, a person can win the game, even if he loses the annotations. The following game is an enjoyable example.
angelcamina - shahramkhoshseffat
1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2019
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4
The Blackburne Shilling Gambit - a practical choice in bullet chess. It is one of those openings that an opponent can be expected to disarm and defeat, if he has enough time; of course there often is not enough time in bullet chess.
4.Bxf7+
However, angelcamina has come prepared! This is the infamous Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit.
(You are right, Reader: there are no game examples of Joseph Henry Blackburne ever playing 3...Nd4. And, you are right again: there are no game examples of Alonzo Wheeler Jerome playing 4.Bxf7+ as a response. However, the opening calls out for the name, and I have supplied it.)
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Ke6 6.Qh5
White's "strongest" move is 6.c3, leading to an even game, but angelcamina is planning to sacrifice his way to victory.
6...Nf6 7.Qf7+ Kxe5 8.f4+ Kxe4 9.Nc3+ Kxf4
What if Black plays 9...Kf5 instead? It turns out that White has already answered that question (more sacrifice), in angelcamina - rabirabi, 1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2019 (1-0, 13).
10.d3+
Warning: if you follow this line of play in the future, angelcamina will improve with 10.0-0+.
10...Ke5 11.O-O Nxc2
One last grab of material.
12.Bf4+ Kd4 13.Qc4 checkmate
One way for Black to make the Jerome Gambit "playable" is to give up tempos without gaining much in return. Bit by bit, White gets more compensation for his sacrificed material, until he has the better game.
angelcamina - shahramkhoshseffat
1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2019
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6
7.Qd5+ Ke8 8.Qxc5 d6 9.Qe3 Nf6
10.O-O Kf7 11.f4 Re8
Stronger than the superficially attractive 11...Ng4, as in angelcamina - frn000,1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2019 (1-0, 23)
12.Nc3
angelcamina has also played 12.d3, in angelcamina - Danielpia, 1-0, bullet, lichess.org, 2019 (1-0, 28)
12...Kg8 13.d4 Ng4 14.Qg3 Nf6
15.f5 Ne7 16.Bg5 Nc6 17.Bh6
This works, but more solid was 17.Rd1.
17...Nh5
This will not turn out well.
18.Qg4 Qf6 19.Qxh5 gxh6 20.Qxe8+ Qf8 21.Qxf8+ Kxf8
White is up the exchange and a couple of pawns. He has only to be careful about the clock.
22.Rad1 Nb4 23.Rd2 Nc6 24.a3 Bd7 25.Nd5 Rc8 26.Re1 a5 27.g4 a4
28.e5 dxe5 29.dxe5 Na5 30.Nf6 Be8 31.Nxh7+ Kg7 32.Nf6 Bf7 33.Rd7 Rf8 34.Nh5+ Kg8 35.e6 White won on time
White's "Jerome pawns" would win the day, in any case.
If a defender is not familiar with the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+), missteps are easy to find. The following game is one example as to how the opening can be effective in club play - one slip, and Black has passed the point of no return.
TitoH - prosoccer
RedHotPawn.com, 2019
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+
4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Ke8
Black turns the advantage over to White, in order to not play along with the attacker's plans. For a recent example, see "Jerome Gambit: Disease 1, Cure 0".
6.Qh5+
The consistent 6.Nxc6 is stronger, although it could lead to the aggressive 6...Qh4!? (There are still no examples of this move in The Database.)
6...g6 7.Nxg6
The Database has 38 games with this position. White scores a hefty 72%.
7...Qf6
For an earlier discussion of this line, review "Jerome Gambit Secrets #3".
Black's strongest response was 7...Bxf2+, leading to a small advantage for him, after 8.Kxf2 Nf6. The earliest examples that I have of 7...Bxf2+ are the twin games Hultgren, R - Harrow, and Blackstone, J - Dommeyer, C, both played in Campbell, California and both played in 1960. Sadly - for Black - The Database has 10 games with the move, with White winning 8 of them.
8.Nxh8+ Ke7 9.d4
9...Bxd4
Tripping over White's out-stretched foot...
10.Bg5 Bxf2+ 11.Ke2 Black resigned
Having played the Jerome Gambits currently available to me in the second round of the "Italian Game Classic" tournament at Chess.com (I have Black in one game, so I will have one more chance this round, after that contest is completed), I have just started play in the second round of the "Italian Game Battlegrounds" tournament at Chess.com, as well. I have Black in one game, but White in another - so, another Jerome Gambit!
I will share the game here, when it is completed.
