Jerome Gambit: Everything Happens Quickly

White is new to the Jerome Gambit, but you would not be able to tell that from the way that he quickly finishes off his opponent. Of course, in a 1-minute game, everything happens quickly.

JuiceCisario - piolhorov
1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2020

1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 Nh6 

In bullet chess, what first comes to mind is often what gets played. Here, Black thinks Hit the Queen! and goes with it.

White calmly decides to Hit the King!

9.Qxe5+ Kc6 10.Nc3 Re8 

This was Black's last chance. He should have tried 10...d6, instead.

11.Qd5+ Kb6 12.Na4+ Kb5 13.Qxc5+ Kxa4 14.b3 chekmate

Very nice.

Jerome Gambit: Quick Finishes

I have received a number of Jerome Gambits that show clearly why players are drawn to it - the sacrifice shows up in a variety of lines, and the games feature quick finishes. Take a look.

In his first Jerome, Kylon tries what I have begun to call an "impatient Jerome Gambit" (White doesn't wait for ...Bc5) against the Hungarian Defense. In this case, impatience is rewarded, with a checkmate in 9 moves.

Kylon - PawnStar10111
3 0 blitz, lichess.org, 2020
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Be7 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.d4 Nc4 8.Qf5+ Kd6 9.Qd5#

Rawnessman applies the Jerome treatment to the Two Knights Defense, in a 1-minute bullet game. His aim is true.

Rawnessman - chepea2019
1 0 bullet, Chess.com, 2020
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.d4 Ng6 7.e5 Nd5 8.Qf3+ Kg8 9.Qxd5#

The_Guccinator does not let his opponent hide in the Petroff Defense. A Jerome-inspired sacrificial attack brings mate in under 10 moves.

The_Guccinator - taks54321
15 10 blitz, Chess.com, 2020
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Ke8 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Nxg6 Rg8 8.Nh8+ Ke7 9.Qe5#

Things did not go exactly as planned for Jean_Kn's opponent in the following game. At least the suffering was short.

Jean_Kn - teozuy
3 0 blitz, lichess.org, 2020
1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 Nf6 8.Qxe5+ Kf7 9.Qxc5 Black resigned

Changing sides of the board, Jean_Kn plays a reversed Jerome Gambit, also know as the Busch-Gass Gambit or Chiodini's Gambit.

Amess923 - Jean_Kn
3 0 blitz, lichess.org, 2020
1.Nf3 e5 2.e4 Bc5 3.Nxe5 Nc6 4.Nxc6 dxc6 5.d3 Nf6 6.Bg5 Bxf2+ 7.Kxf2 Nxe4+ 8.dxe4 Qxd1 White resigned

DropBearMKJ's first Jerome Gambit turned out better than he expected, and certainly better than his opponent had hoped.

DropBearMKJ - ximikmamaj
3 2 blitz, Chess.com, 2020
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 Qf6 8.Qxc5 Black resigned

Here we have another Two Knights that gets ambushed by an impatient Jerome Gambit. I think we've seen this kind of ending position before.

ChessBrah - kevvvvvvv
5 0 blitz, Chess.com, 2020
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nc6 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.d4 Nc6 7.e5 Nd5 8.Qf3+ Kg8 9.Qxd5#

Martynas-S is ready for a full fight after 8 moves in the Jerome Gambit. His opponent, however, is ready to turn over his King.

Martynas-S - OKKidA
5 2 blitz, lichess.org, 2020
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qxh8 Black resigned

Jerome Gambit: To b or Not To b

The fate of Black's b-pawn overshadows much of the following game. It never falls - but the defender's attention is distracted enough that White makes progress elsewhere and slowly overwhelms the position.

Wall, Bill - Guest173767
PlayChess.com, 2020

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 7.Qxc5 d6 8.Qd5+

8...Ke8 

Yes, Black can offer the b-pawn with 8...Be6. This was seen in Wall, Bill - CheckMe, Chess.com, 2010 (1-0, 23) and Wall,B - Guest249301, PlayChess.com 2013 (1-0, 30).

There are other ways to decline:

8...Ke7 as in Wall,B - Guest4395, Internet, 2001 (1-0, 18) and Wall,B - Guest3157671, PlayChess.com, 2014 (1-0, 28); and

8...Kf8, Wall,B - Chung,J., Chess.com, 2010 (1-0, 25).

9.d3

Or 9.d4 as in Wall,B - Am53, PlayChess.com, 2013 (1-0, 14) and Wall,B - Guest7665109, PlayChess.com, 2019 (1-0, 22).

9...h6

Or 9...c6 in Wall,B - Seven11, Chess.com, 2008 (1-0, 51).

10.O-O c6 11.Qb3 Qf6 

12.Nc3 b5 

Still worrying about the b-pawn possibly falling to the enemy Queen.

13.a4 Rb8 14.axb5 cxb5 15.Rxa7 Be6 

Can you feel it? The weather is changing...

16.Qb4 Bd7 17.Nd5 Qf8 18.Nc7+ Ke7 19.f4
Black resigned

Black is feeling the Rook's pressure along the 7th rank, and will soon face more uncomfortable line-opening with e4-e5, plus the annoying f4-f5. It is all too much.

Jerome Gambit: Including Unknown Region

Please Note: I have recently received so many interesting Jerome Gambit games, many from those who have tried it for the first time, that I will begin posting on this blog daily, rather than every-other-day, so I can share more, more frequently. -Rick 

It has been a while since I have looked at the statistics that blogger.com collects about this blog about the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+). 

On May 23, 2020, it listed the top 10 audiences for the last month, in order, as

United States

Hong Kong

Turkmenistan

Romania

United Kingdom

Unknown Region

Germany

Canada

France

Russia

There were a few surprises in that list. For starters, I am not sure if everyone in 6th place all come from a particular region that is, for some reason, "unknown" - or if there was a measurable amount of error in reporting home countries, and these individuals were all scooped up and placed in "unknown"; perhaps they were using VPNs or blocking their location.

In any event: Welcome, Readers!

* * * *

For the lifetime of the Jerome Gambit blog, the audience looks like this

United States
Russia
Germany
France
Ukraine
United Kingdom
Poland
Brazil
Canada
Japan 

Again: Welcome Readers!

One More Thought

Musing over the earlier post, "Unasked Questions", which concerned itself with a sort of an "impatient Jerome Gambit" - 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 (the Two Knights Defense) 4.Bxf7+ (not waiting for Black to play ...Bc5) - I remembered a tangential question that I had asked about what impact further developing a Knight for each side - creating the Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ - would have, compared to the regular Jerome Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+.

It turned out that Komodo 10 evaluated the Four Knights version as improving Black's position 3/4 of a pawn over Black's position in the regular Jerome. Furthermore, The Database showed that Black scored 61% in the Four Knights variation, versus 54% in the regular Jerome Gambit line.

So, I had one more thought: Might that mean, analagously, that the line that we looked at in the earlier post would be stronger for Black than if we stripped away a Knight from each side, i.e. if we had Komodo 10 look at 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Bxf7+ ? (Would I dare to call it a sort of "accelerated impatient Jerome Gambit"? I hope not.)

It turns out that Komodo 10, at 30 ply, sees only about 3/100th of a pawn's difference between 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Bxf7+ and 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Bxf7+. Not much at all, as far as computer evaluation goes.

However, checking The Database, I noted 479 games with 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Bxf7+ and 443 games with 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Bxf7+. In the first case, Black scored 61%; in the second case, 52%. From a practical point of view, that may be significant - even if you take into account that The Database is not as statistically representative for these two lines, because my data collection has not been as rigorous.

In both cases, it seems that Black's practical chances are improved as his development increases, even though White increases his development equally.

Curious.

Should White abandon the Jerome Gambit for 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Bxf7+? No, I wouldn't go that far.

But I would refer Readers to "Jerome-Knight Gambit" for a collection of those accelerated, impatient games.

Jerome Gambit: New Games Coming

GM Aman Hambleton, of CHESSBRAHS, over at chess.com, also at Twitch, has stirred up a good bit of interest in the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) in the last few days, due to his video (mentioned in the previous post) concerning the Jerome (it can be found on YouTube.com).

I also have to credit GM Eric Hansen, who I watched on the CHESSBRAHS site try for two hours to get a Jerome Gambit game going, but was frustrated in his attempts. 

As a result, I have received many emails and messages, as well as a good selection of new Jerome Gambit games - including one by the computer program Leela Chess Zero, rated over 3600!  

I plan to share those games, although it may take me a few days to get them posted on this blog. Please be patient - and keep an eye out.

In the meantime, it is always possible to use the "search this blog" function to explore this site further. I have also found that if I use an internet search engine (like Google, Bing, or DuckDuckGo) for a string of moves - say, "6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 Qe7" it will turn up links to relevant posts on this blog.

Thank you - Rick   

Jerome Gambit: All In Good Fun

I thought that Jon Speelman had had the last, friendly, justifiable, Grandmaster laugh at the Jerome Gambit four years ago, in his "Agony Column #24" over at chessbase.com, where he dissected a couple of my games that I had shared with him - but it turns out that I was wrong.

YouTube.com has recently posted a video by Canadian GM Aman Hambleton (aka TOMMYFOOKINSHELBY, at Chess.com, see the previous blog posts "Jerome Gambit: Smash Finish" and "Unasked Questions") that hilariously gives the Jerome Gambit, this blog, and me, our just due - and then some. All in good fun.

It is must viewing for all Readers.

In the meantime, especially to those new to this blog, let me quote from a post from the first month of this blog, a dozen years ago, titled "But - Is this stuff playable? (Part 1)"

Of course not.The Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) has many refutations. 

I'm glad that's settled. 

Maybe a more useful question would be -- Under what conditions might the Jerome Gambit be playable?

Perhaps in friendly games, in bullet games, in blitz games, in games where you are giving "Jerome Gambit odds" to a weaker player - the opening might just be playable. (It is helpful to keep in mind Geoff Chandler's whimsical "blunder table" in this regard.)

I am reminded of Gary Kasparov's response, when someone suggested 1...g5!? as a response to 1.c4 - "Chess isn't skittles". Certainly he was right - at the grandmaster and master level of play. But, for many club and amateur players, chess is skittles; and the Jerome Gambit fits right in.

By the way, from an academic point of view, the Jerome Gambit is often a study of "errors in thinking" - exactly how does someone lose to "the worst chess opening, ever"?