Jerome Gambit: The Value of The Best Response

Sometimes I get the notion in my Jerome Gambits that I am just fine, as long as my opponent doesn't find the best response here.

What do I do if my opponent does find the best response?

Well, I lose.

perrypawnpusher - cool64chess

Jerome Gambit Classic #1, Chess.com, 2024

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Kf8 

In our 2nd round game, cool64chess played 6...Ke6 (1-0, 28).

7.Qxe5 

This position has occured in 54 of my games, where I have scored 71%.

That is a bit misleading, however, as more generally, in 3,192 games in The Database, White collectively scored only 48%.

7...d5 

This is probably Black's best response (followed closely by 7...d6 and 7...Qe7) but it is relatively rare: The Database has only 30 games with the move, with White's scoring slipping to 35%.

This was my first time facing the move. 

8.0–0 

White might have done better advancing his d-pawn one or two steps.

In the same tournament, my opponent faced 8.exd5 Bd6 9.Qe3 Nf6 10.c4 Kf7 11.0–0 Bxh2+ 12.Kh1 Bd6 13.Nc3 Re8 14.Qd3 g6 15.b3 Bf5 16.Qd4 Ne4 17.c5 Qh4+ White resigned, mconto - cool64chess, Jerome Gambit Classic #1, Chess.com 2024.

8...Nf6 9.d4 Bd6 10.Qg5 

10...dxe4 11.Nc3 Kf7 

Curiously enough, this position has been reached via a not-o-well-travelled sidelineof the Petroff Defense: cirbals - Melospego, 1 0 bullet, lichess.org 2019, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.d4 Nxe4 4.Nxe5 d5 5.Bd3 Nd7 6.O-O Bd6 7.Nxf7 Kxf7 8.Qh5+ Ke6 9.Bxe4 dxe4 10.Nc3 Nf6 11.Qg5 Kf7* 12.Re1 Re8 13.Bd2 (13.Bf4 Bxf4 14.Qxf4 Kg8 15.d5 Qd6 16.Qh4 Bd7 17.Rad1 a6 18.Nxe4 Nxe4 19.Rxe4 Rxe4 20.Qxe4 Re8 21.Qf3 Qe5 22.h3 Qf5 23.Qc3 Qe5 24.Qb3 Kh8 25.Qxb7 Bf5 26.Qc6 Be4 27.Re1 Bxd5 28.Qxe8+ Qxe8 29.Rxe8+ Bg8 30.b3 h6 31.f4 Kh7 32.Kf2 Bd5 33.c4 c6 34.cxd5 cxd5 35.Ke3 Kg6 36.g4 Kf7 37.Re5 d4+ 38.Kxd4 Kf6 39.h4 a5 40.g5+ hxg5 41.fxg5+ Kf7 42.Ke4 g6 43.Kf4 a4 44.bxa4 Kg7 45.a5 Kf7 46.a6 Kg7 47.a7 Kf7 48.a8Q Kg7 49.Qb7+ Kf8 50.Rc5 Ke8 51.Rc8# Albertoborea72 - Melospego, 1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2021) Kg8 14.Nd5 Nxd5 15.Qxd5+ Kh8 16.Rxe4 Rxe4 17.Qxe4 Bd7 18.Re1 h6 19.d5 Qh4 20.Qxh4 White won on time

12.Re1

After the game, Stockfish 16.1 recommended 12.f3. 

12...h6 13.Qb5 

One criticism of the Jerome Gambit is that it moves the Queen too early and too often. This game is a good example. 

13...c6 14.Qf1 

Sad. The alternative, 14.Qb3+ Kg6!? 15.Nxe4 Nxe4 16.Rxe4 Bf5 is only a small improvement.

14...Bf5 15.f3 exf3 16.Qxf3 Bxc2 

White is simply a piece down, with little compensation.

17.Bf4 Bxf4 18.Qxf4 Qd7 19.Re2 Bg6 20.Rae1 

 

It is not at all clear that the temporary control of the e-file benefits White - but neither would a very reasonable resignation about now.

20...Rae8 21.Re5 Rhf8 22.Ne2 Kg8 

Castling-by-hand is the final blow.

23.Qg3 Kh7 24.h3 Ne4 25.Qh4 Rxe5 26.dxe5 Qd2 White resigned

Black dominates.

Very nicely done.

Jerome Gambit: Overview

For a quick look at the ideas of the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) there is the recent video "Jerome Gambit is The Best Chess Opening".

As an introduction, it runs under 2 1/2 minutes, and is a sampling that might help the viewer decide, "Is the Jerome Gambit for me, or not?"

Of course, you could also read the 4,400 posts on this blog, but that might take a bit longer...

Jerome Gambit: FM Graif Is At It Again

As I wrote about a year and a half ago, in the post "Busch-Gass Gambit Standard Bearer"

From time to time this Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) blog has looked at "reversed" Jerome and Jerome-ish Gambits, most notably the Busch-Gass Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Bc5) - earlier known as the "Charlick Gambit" - and its relatives Chiodini's Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Bc5 3.Nxe5 Nc6) and the Stafford Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 Nc6).

The Busch-Gass Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Bc5 has found a special place in the heart of FIDE Master William Graif, and this is shown most recently in a couple more of his videos: 

14 Moves For My BUSCH-GASS GAMBIT to Wreck a LEGEND of Online Chess

and 

How the Busch-Gass Gambit Always DESTROYS "Stockfish Refutation"

Enjoy.

Jerome Gambit: Perplexity

I have a growing interest in learning about what is called "artificial intelligence" (AI), as presented by programs such as ChatGPT.

In fact, readers of this blog may recall that I have interacted with ChatGPT several times, on behalf of the Jerome Gambit, as chronicled in the post "SMH: ChatGPT Again".

Reportedly one of the knowledge area weaknesses that ChatGPT has is the topic of chess. Certainly my experience has supported that conclusion.

The other day I decided to visit some more AI, this time at the Perplexity.ai website ("Where Knowledge Begins"). After an initial stumble, Perplexity righted itself and provided some wisdom.

What is the Jerome Gambit? Is it any good?

The Jerome Gambit is a chess opening that begins with the moves:

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bc4 Bc5
4. O-O Nf6
5. d4 exd4
6. c3

White sacrifices a pawn to open lines and gain initiative. Black accepts the pawn with 6...dxc3, allowing White to sacrifice the knight with 7. Nxc3. If Black accepts with 7...Nxe4, White can then sacrifice the bishop with 8. Bxf7+.

This is wrong, of course. The Jerome Gambit is 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+.

However, what follows is true about the Jerome.

 

Regarding its quality, opinions are divided:

The Jerome Gambit is considered an objectively dubious opening that relies heavily on the opponent making inaccurate moves. It gives White a very risky and unbalanced position in return for the sacrificed material. Strong players generally avoid it as Black has relatively straightforward ways to equalize or even gain an advantage with precise play.

However, the Jerome Gambit can be effective at lower levels where opponents may struggle to find the best defensive resources. It leads to very sharp and complicated positions that can punish inaccuracies. The gambit experienced a surge in popularity in 2020 after the chess streamer chessbrah featured it in a video, quintupling its usage on lichess.org from around 20 games per day to over 100 games per day at its peak.

So while not considered a reliable try for an advantage at higher levels, the Jerome Gambit remains a popular option for amateur players seeking complicated, unbalanced positions that can punish mistakes. Its objective quality is dubious, but it can lead to fascinating battles when played against imperfect opposition.

True that.

Jerome Gambit: A Bit Dizzy

 

I sometimes start my day with an internet search (Google, Bing, Yandex, Dogpile) for the term "Jerome Gambit".

Today's search led to an adventure that left me a bit dizzy.

First off, let me say that years ago, I used to review chess books for the (now defunct) website Chessville. (See "From My Psychology Career to This Blog & Wiki's Attention") I favored books from small presses or those that were self-published, because they often were the product of a lot of hard work, and a love for the topic covered.

That said, early this morning I stumbled across the following from an online article on the Jerome Gambit, that it

involves sacrificing a pawn in the early stages of the game to gain a positional advantage

Okay, that looks like a case of mistaken identity. The Jerome Gambit involves sacrificing one or two pieces. Maybe the writer was thinking of the Evans Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4)?

Continuing

It was named after the American master and chess writer Jerome Gambit 

The Jerome Gambit was named after Alonzo Wheeler Jerome (see my posts "The Life of Alonzo Wheeler Jerome" and "The Man, the Myth, the Legend..."), who enjoyed chess as much as the next person (although his work often got in the way - e.g. a comment by S. A. Charles in the October, 1881 issue of Brentano's Chess Monthly: "Unfortunately Mr. Jerome's business engagements have prevented him from playing out the full number of games originally started...") but who was hardly considered a "master".

Jerome wrote the booklet "The Great Debate (Parts I, II, III, IV & V)" while serving as a guide at the statehouse in Springfield, Illinois. He wrote letters to editors of publications like the American Chess Journal and the Dubuque Chess Journal, but I think it is a stretch to consider him a "chess writer."

Still, it is quite true that 

By willingly sacrificing material, players utilizing the Jerome Gambit aim to disrupt their opponent’s plans

Also,

Over time, the Jerome Gambit garnered attention from chess enthusiasts worldwide 

This last point is illustrated by the American Chess Journal of September & October 1877 

We are plaesed to note that the daring and brilliant debut invented by our friend Jerome, of Paxton, Ill, is receiving recognition abroad, both among players ande analysts. Sr. Vazques, the Mexican Champion, plays it with fine success when yielding the odds of a Knight ,while Mr. Charlick, a strong Australian player, has been giving us some fine specimines of his chess skill in the new opening; some time since the Italian Chess Magazine published a game at this opening with favorable commenst on the "new departure" and in the May number of the Nordisk Skaktidende, S.A. Sorensen gives us a sparkling analysis of the "Americanism", a translation of which we herewith present. The MSS was submitted to Mr. Jerome, who expresses himself highly pleased with the thoroughness and ability with which our Danish contemporary has presented the subject. Here we may state that the Chess Players Chronicle for June gives a translation of the analysis of the Danish magazine.

And, yet, today's article said

One common line starts with 1.e4 e5, 2.Bc4 Bc5, and 3.b4, offering the pawn sacrifice.

 Well, the Jerome Gambit is 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+.

Instead, 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.b4 has been called the Bishop's opening, wing gambit; the Bishop's opening, McDonnell's gambit; and the La Bourdonnais-Denker Gambit.

Still, it is only fair to give the article's author the last word

As with any chess opening, the Jerome Gambit has its own set of pros and cons. On the positive side, it can catch opponents off guard, disturb their usual plans, and create imbalances that can lead to tactical opportunities. However, the Jerome Gambit can also be risky, as it involves sacrificing a pawn and potentially exposing weaknesses in your own position. It requires a deep understanding of positional play and tactical awareness to fully utilize its potential.

I actually discussed the OCF website last year, specifically its post: "EXPLORING THE JEROME GAMBIT: A RISKY BUT FUN OPENING". See "Jerome Gambit: Wandering the Internet". There are around 300 topics covered at the OCF Chess & Board Games site, mostly concerning chess, and certainly all are educational and entertaining.

I recommend that you take a look.

 

Jerome Gambit: My Longest Game (Part 2)

 

[continued from previous post]

sinipete - perrypawnpusher

Jerome Gambit Classic #1, Chess.com, 2024

We have reached an endgame that may (or may not) be a bit better for me, with Black.

23.b3 Ncxe3 

Careless. Certainly 23...Ne5 was not hard to fine. 

24.c4 

Upsetting Black's Knights' balancing act.

24...Nxg2 25.cxd5 Nf4+ 26.Kd2 Nxd5 

Black should be able to hold this position.

27.Rf1+ Ke7 28.h4 g5 29.hxg5 hxg5 30.Rf5 Kd6 31.Rxg5 Kc6 

I was okay trading 2 pawns for 1 on the Kingside, as it makes my defense a bit less complicated.

 32.Kd3 b5 

Stockfish 16.1 (38 ply) recommends 32...Ne7. 

33.Rg6+ Kb7 34.Kd4 Ne7 35.Re6 Nc8 36.Kc5 a6 37.Re8 Nb6 

My strategy for the rest of the game is to build and maintain a fortress.

38.Rd8 Nc8 39.Kd5 Na7 40.Rh8 Nc6 41.Rh6 Na5 42.Rh3 Nc6 43.Rc3 Ne7+ 44.Ke6 Nc6 

45.Kd7 Nb8+ 46.Ke6 Nc6 47.Rh3 Na5 48.Kd5 Nc6 49.Rh6 Nb8 50.a4 bxa4 51.bxa4 Nd7 52.a5 

Phew!

Now the game enters a different stage, one governed by the "50-move rule": a player can claim a a draw if no pawn has been moved and no pieces have been captured in the last 50 moves.

Up to this point, I had made a couple of draw offers, but they were declined.

Oh, well. Here we go. Fifty moves of piece-shuffling. 

52...Nb8 53.Rh4 Nc6 54.Ra4 Nb8 55.Rb4+ Kc8 56.Kc5 Nd7+ 57.Kd5 Nb8 58.Rh4 Nd7 59.Rh6 Nb8 60.Kc4 Kb7 61.Kc5 Nd7+ 62.Kb4 Nb8 63.Rh7 Nc6+ 64.Ka4 Nb8 65.Rh6Nc6 66.Rh5 Nb8 67.Kb4 Nc6+ 68.Kc4 Nb8 69.Rc5 Nd7 70.Rd5 Nb8 71.Rh5 Nc6 72.Rc5 Nb8 73.Kd5 Nd7 74.Rc6 Nb8 75.Rg6 Nd7 76.Rg1 Nb8 77.Rc1 Nd7 78.Ke6 Nb8 79.Kd5 Nd7 80.Rc4 Nb8 81.Ke6 Nc6 82.Rc5 Nb8 83.Ke7 Nc6+ 84.Kd7 Nb8+ 85.Ke6 Nc6 86.Kd5 Nb8 87.Rc2 Nd7 88.Rb2+ Kc8 89.Ke6 Nb8 90.Rc2 Nd7 91.Rd2 Nb8 92.Rd5 Nc6 93.Rc5 Nb8 94.Kd5 Nd7 95.Rc6 Nb8 96.Rc5 Nd7 97.Rc6 Nb8 98.Rf6 Kb7 99.Rh6 Nd7 100.Rh8 Nb8 101.Ke6 Nc6 102.Rh5 Nb8 103.Rc5 Nc6 104.Kd7 Nb8+ Draw

I have only myself to blame for this exercise in exhaustion. I had chances for a better game and possible win, earlier.

Jerome Gambit: My Longest Game (Part 1)

In my battle for third place (in my group, 3rd round) in the Jerome Classic #1 tournament at Chess.com, my clearest competitor is sinipete. A win and a draw against him helps me.

mconto is likely to finish ahead of me. I scored 1 - 1 in our games.

cool64chess is probably going to stampede over all of us and take first place in the group. My games with him are still going, but I will be fortunate to salvage 1/2 a point.

What follows is the longest game that I have ever played, which means that it is also the longest Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) that I have ever played; in this case, defended against. (See "Jerome Gambit: The Long And The Short of It (Part 1)")

After squandering an advantage, I hung on for the draw. An opportunity wasted: no ground lost, but no ground gained.

sinipete - perrypawnpusher

Jerome Gambit Classic #1, Round 3, Chess.com, 2024

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.O-O 

This is one of the "modern" Jerome Gambit variations, instead of the "classical" 5.Nxe5+.

5...Nf6 6.d3 Rf8 

7.Be3 

I have also seen 7.Ng5+ in Capt.Mandrake - perrypawnpusher, Jerome Gambit 3 Thematic, ChessWorld.net 2008 (0-1, 8) and 7.Bg5 as in drewbear - perrypawnpusher, Jerome Gambit 3 Thematic, ChessWorld.net, 2008 (0-1, 22). 

7... Bxe3 8.fxe3 Kg8 

Black has a piece for a pawn. Both Kings are safe. White's pawn center is a bit stronger.

9.h3 d5 10.exd5 Nxd5 11.Qe2 Be6 12.Nbd2 Qd7 

13.Ne4 h6 14.Nc5 Qe7 15.Nxe6 Qxe6 16.a3 

16...e4 

Preparing to open the game.

17.Nd4 exd3 

It would be better to exchange Knights, first: 17...Nxd4 18.exd4 e3. 

18.Nxe6 dxe2 19. Rxf8+ Rxf8 20. Nxf8 

20...Kxf8 

Routine play. After the game, I found 20...Nxe3 21.Ne6 Nd1, which would be quietly crushing for Black. White could improve with 21.Re1 Nd4 22.Ne6 Nexc2 23.Nxd4 Nxe1 24.Nxe2, but he would still be worse.

21.Kf2 Ne5 22.Kxe2 Nc4 

The two Knights are a match for the Rook and pawn. In fact, Stockfish 16 (38 ply) sees them as about 1 1/4 pawns better.

[to be continued]