Jerome Gambit: Incomplete Script

 

Many years ago, when I was a middle school student, I wrote a light-hearted playlet about a conflict between a Batman-like hero and his nemesis. It turned out that the bad guy had stolen the actual script of the play from the author before it had been completed (!), so he was able to write in a number of mishaps that befell the good guy in his pursuit of justice. As luck would have it, however, the final confrontation between the two characters had not yet been scripted by the author, and the evil-doer had not bothered to add an ending. So, the hero was able to ad-lib his lines and his actions, allowing good to triumph over evil, and the bad guy - who realized that time had run out on him - was defeated.

This tale was repeated, over an over again, metaphorically, in the games I played against a chess pal at the time, who would regularly complain, "I was beating you, right up to the point where you checkmated me!" Indeed.

All of this came to mind as I played over the following 1-minute Noa Gambit (a Jerome Gambit relative) game by angelcamina. Let me be clear: angelcamina has over 1,200 games in The Database, scoring 62%, and clearly qualifying him as a "good guy".

In the following game, angelcamina battles adversity and is faced, at the end, with distaster. Except, the "script" had not been completed, and with a final move, he triumphed over his opponent.

angelcamina - rutkaycabuk

1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2024

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nxe4 5.Bxf7+ 

As I wrote in "Against the Knights", this is

The Noa Gambit, otherwise known as the Monck Gambit, otherwise known as the Open Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit. White gets his sacrifice, after all.

5...Kxf7 6.Nxe4 d5 7.Neg5+ Kg8 8.d4 

8...e4 9.Ne5 Nxe5 10.dxe5 Be7 11.Nxe4 

In a game with a slow time control, this move might be labelled "self-injurious behavior". In 1-minute bullet game, however, it can be seen as a calculated risk.

11...dxe4 12.Qxd8+ Bxd8 13.Bf4 Bf5 14.O-O-O Be7 15.e6 

15...Rd8 16.Rxd8+ Bxd8 17. Re1 Bf6 18.f3 exf3 

19.e7 f2 

Threatening the Rook, hoping to promote - and overlooking something.

20.e8=Q checkmate

Oh, yeah, that... But it wasn't in the script!

Jerome Gambit: Good Enough for Second

The following Jerome Gambit game helped me finish in second place in the Jerome Gambit Classic #1 at Chess.com. Indeed, as predicted, cool64chess took top honors. moisesah finished third.

accattone444 - perrypawnpusher

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+ g6 

7.Qxe5 Qe7 8.Qd5+ Kg7 

Or 8...Ke8 as in perrypawnpusher - moush54, Chess.com, 2021 (1-0, 23) 

9.d4 

Stepping away from Yury V. Bukayev's 9.b4 (see "JG:The New in Its Opening Theory, in Its Psychology (Part 15)"), which I tried in perrypawnpusher - auswebby, Chess.com, 2023 (0-1, 26).

9...Bb6 10.O-O  

Or 10.Nd2 as in shachaf2 - perrypawnpusher, Chess.com, 2023. 

10...Nf6 11.Qb3 Qxe4 12.Nc3 Qe7 

White has a pawn and freer development for his piece - not quite enough.

13.Bg5 Qf7 

It was possible to grab the d-pawn, but more prudent to try to exchange Queens.

14.Bh6+ Kg8 15.d5 Ng4 16.Bg5 Kg7 

17.Nd1 Rf8 18.Qc3+ Kg8 19.Bh4 d6 

Again, Black needs development more than he needs the enemy d-pawn.

20.h3 Nf6 

21.Ne3 Bd7 22.Rae1 Bb5 

Here, I thought I was winning the exchange, but, no.

23.Bxf6 Qxf6 24.Qxf6 Rxf6 25.c4 

Fair enough, but Black's extra piece still makes itself felt.

25...Bxe3 26.cxb5 Bd4 27.Re7 Rf7 28.Re2 Raf8 

This much pressure has to yield something.

29.g3 Rf3 30.Kg2 R3f5 31.g4 Rxd5 32.Re7 Rc5 White resigns

White has had enough.

Jerome Gambit: Light-Hearted Calculations (Addendum)

                                                      

To add to the light-hearted calculations I did the previous blog post, I examined if The Database indicated that, over time, I had gotten better or worse playing the Jerome Gambit?

Looking at the 80 perrypawnpusher games from 2004 through 2009, where I played 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+, I scored 87%.

Looking at the 116 perrypawnpusher games from 2019 through 2024, where I played 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+, I scored 80%.

I have gotten worse over time?

Some of that fall-off can be attributed to the stronger (higher-rated) opponents in the more recent games. 

Also, the time control may have had a small effect.

The games in the first group were played at a blitz time control 84% of the time, a pace where the surprise of the Jerome Gambit worked in my favor.  

In the more recent group, the time controls were longer - only 5% were blitz - giving my opponents a bit more time to recover from the shock of the Jerome Gambit and plan resistance.

All of the numbers are presented in good fun.

It is also still relevant to recall Mark Twain's assessment of statistics.

Of course, I will continue to play the Jerome.

Jerome Gambit: Light-Hearted Calculations

 

The other day I took a trip back in time, to some blog posts from a dozen years ago. In "The Jerome Gambit: Helping or Hurting?" I had written

Looking at The Database today, I noticed that I had played 250 rated games with the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+).

My score was 83%, which I thought was pretty good. 

Then I wondered: maybe I scored well because I simply played my refuted opening against weaker players...

So, I looked at my average rating for those games, and the average rating of my opponents, and it was true: my opponents were, generally, weaker. 

By about 65 rating points. 

That would mean that instead of playing equally-rated opponents and expecting to score 50%, I was playing slightly weaker opponents, and was expected to score about 60%. 

Ooops! 

With the Jerome Gambit I was still scoring 23% higher than expected.

 

Today, The Database shows that I have played 449 games with 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+, scoring 82% - remarkably consistent with the previous number.

In the current statistics, I averaged being rated about 140 points above my opponent. (Again, this is not surprising, as in many games I was giving "Jerome Gambit odds".) The expectation is that I would score 69%. Instead, I scored 13% higher than expected.

A similar look at The Database for the Italian Four Knights Jerome Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bc5 4.Bxf7+, shows 72 games, with my expected score (based on the difference between average ratings) being 60% - while it was actually 75%, 15% higher than expected.

When it comes to the Blackburne Shilling Jerome Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4 4.Bxf7+, in 46 games my expected score was 57%, while my actual score was 90% - a solid 33% higher.

Finally, as for the Semi-Italian Jerome Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.0-0 Bc5 5.Bxf7+, in 61 games my expected score was 54%. while my actual score was 89% - 45% higher.

So: Why do I continue to play the Jerome Gambit?

Of course, because it is fun.

But, also, because it helps me perform above expectations.

Jerome Gambit: Outplayed Again

With almost 800 games in The Database, I think I know a good bit about the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+).

How to over-ride that opening advantage?

Just outplay me, as cool64chess does in the following game.

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 

A good choice, for a number of reasons, including the fact that I have not done as well against 6...Kf8 as I have against 6...g6 or 6...Ke6.

The move is at least as old as Alonzo Wheeler Jerome's analysis in the July 1874 issue of the Dubuque Chess Journal. Jerome later used it successfully in correspondence games against Daniel Jaeger in 1880.

7.Qxe5 d6 8.Qg3 Nf6 9.Nc3 Kf7 

Black prepares to castle-by-hand.

10.d3 Re8 11.Bg5 Bd4 

An interesting idea, protecting the Knight at f6 and attacking the Knight at c3.

12.O-O h6 13.Be3 Bxc3 14.bxc3 Qe7 

White has to act before Black's King becomes comfortable, or his task will become more difficult.

15.f4 Bd7 16.Rae1 Kg8 17.c4 

Taking time to prevent ...d6-d5.

17...Kh8 18.Bd4 Rf8 

A plan for White? Advance the f-pawn, move the Queen to f4, and start advancing the g- and h-pawns.

Instead, I was attracted to the e-file, where my Rook faced Black's Queen, and decided on a break - that never came.

19.e5 Nh5 

A smart response.

20.Qf3 

Better was to move to e3.

20...Nxf4 21.Qxb7 

This move looks desperate.

21...Qg5 22.Be3 Nh3+ 23.Kh1 Qxe3 24.gxh3 Qc5 White resigned

Black is intending 25.Bc6+, which can not be met.

Jerome Gambit: There's More to It Than Just Looking Scary

If you are a chessplayer who is unfamiliar with the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+), you might consider it all flash and no substance, and welcome the "donation" of a couple of pieces to your game.

That kind of thinking might ward off a sense of panic while defending, but it can handicap constructing a defense.

accattone444 - shevapr

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+ Ke6 

7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 

This is a standard Jerome Gambit position, with over 1,300 examples in The Database.

8...g6 

This move is relatively rare, however. In fact, Black scores 1 - 15 - 2 with it.

It is as if the second player mutters Begone, silly Queen!

Things don't always work out that way, however.

9.Qxe5+ Kc6 10.d4 

White had 10.Qd5+ and 10.Qxh8 as alternatives. Perhaps he was feeling lucky.

10...Qf6 

Perhaps it is sometimes true that Simple problems have simple solutions, but in this case even a more complicated attempt at a solution, 10...Qh4+ 11.g3 Qh5 12.Qxh5 gxh5 13.dxc5 Nf6 would not suffice.

11.Qxc5 checkmate

Jerome Gambit: Typical

The following Jerome Gambit game has "typical" tactical themes that makes it educational - and fun - to play over.

cool64chess - vkar33

Jerome Gambit Classic #1, Chess.com, 2024

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.O-O 

A "modern" variation of the Jerome Gambit, as opposed to the "classical" 5.Nxe5+. 

5...h6 

Black makes the sometimes-troublesome g5 square "off limits" to White's pieces.

In other games in the tournament, cool64chess has faced 5...Nf6 in cool64chess - perrypawnpusher, Jerome Gambit Classic #1, Chess.com, 2024 (1/2 - 1/2, 31); cool64chess - Etus11, Jerome Gambit Classic #1, Chess.com, 2024, (1-0, 41); and cool64chess - sinipete, Jerome Gambit Classic #1, Chess.com, 2024 (1-0, 18). 

6.c3 

Planning the typical Giuoco Piano action in the center.

6...Nf6 7.d4 Bd6 8.dxe5 

How should Black recapture - and Why?

The Database has 8 other games with this position, and in each one Black now chose to have his Knight exchanged, as in the game.

8...Nxe5 

Oddly enough, though, 8...Bxe5 would have likely been better, even given that 9.Nxe5+ Nxe5 would have surrendered the "minor exchange" (Bishop for Knight). The reason is that the re-capturing piece would more easily escape White's oncoming pawns.

9.Nxe5+ Bxe5 10.f4 Bd6 11.e5 

Concering the previous note: 8...Bxe5 9.Nxe5+ Nxe5 10.f4 Nc6.

11...Bc5+ 12.Kh1 

It is time for Black to return some material and accept an equal game.

12...Ne4 

Looks good at first glance - but only for a glance. It allows White a typical Jerome Gambit tactic, followed by a typical Jerome Gambit attack on the King.

Correct was 12...d6 13.exf6 Qxf6. 

13.Qd5+ Ke7 14.Qxe4 Re8 15.Qg6 Kf8 16.f5 Rxe5 17.f6 Black resigned.