Was H.Nakamura Right? Is JG ‘Unbreakable’, Is EG ‘Legendary’
For Beginners’ Games? (Part 5)
(by Yury V. Bukayev)
Once again, if an expert’s appraisal is based on something without real proofs, he can be right or “almost right” here sometimes. That is so, even in the case where he realizes that his appraisal is hasty, or non-serious, or bold, or emotional. Sometimes he is right here for a large per cent (for example, 55, 75 or 95) of cases which he appraises.
We remember Rick Kennedy’s post ‘Jerome Gambit: Which Tier? Unbreakable?’ (September 23, 2020) where the notable dialogue about the standard system of the Jerome gambit (JG) between Top GM Hikaru Nakamura and IM Levy Rozman was shown as the part of their popular video and as its approximate text. Thus, they have discussed there what chess opening tier for beginners’ practice is right for it. The end of this text contains several phrases by Mr. Nakamura where he places the standard system of JG near the top of ‘Unbreakable’. Mr. Nakamura’s words contain no proofs of this very high appraisal. In my opinion, the tier’s name ‘Unbreakable’ is very arguable, because we discuss an opening practice, not an opening theory: each opening can be broken in a game as a result of practical mistakes of a player. But this name plays no role for us, just this very high appraisal of 4.Bxf7+ for beginners’ practice is important for our consideration.
Before writing of my Part 1 of this analytical research (please, look at it: it’s a blog post of October 16, 2022) it was enough difficult for me to prove this Hikaru Nakamura’s appraisal, for a large per cent of cases. It was necessary to choose a certain control of time for beginners’ games, and I have chosen an unlimited one. And in the Part 1, Part 2, Part 3 of this research I have made some clear proofs of this Mr. Nakamura’s appraisal and some “not absolutely clear proofs” of it. We shouldn’t forget that the word ‘unbreakable’ includes a draw, not only a win.
And here are my new invented traps - no.7 and no.8 - which are based on a similar ‘natural’ reaction of a beginner.
Traps 7 and 8. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 (Black defends his pieces, it is a typical response for an unlimited game.) 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 Qf6 9.fxe5 Qxe5 10.Qf3 Nf6 11.b4! AN (The analogous idea after 8…Qh4+ 9.g3 Qf6 10.fxe5 Qxe5 11.Qf3 Nf6 is 12.b4 AN with a similar play, but we have no opportunity to consider it now.) 11…Qxa1!? (It’s a typical reaction for beginners and not only for them. Moreover, 11…Qxa1 isn’t a bad move here, so it is a whole opening variation, in fact. Nevertheless, 11.b4 is my trap no.7, because after another “natural” response-mistake 11…Nxe4? 12.bxc5+ Nxc5+ 13.Kd1!! Qxa1!? 14.Nc3 the position is unclear.) 12.bxc5+! Kxc5? (It’s also a typical reaction for beginners and not only for them. This “natural” move is a blunder, in fact. So, 12.bxc5+ is my trap no.8. This is a rare case in Jerome gambit: both traps on the same opening line are strong moves.) 13.d4+!!, and White has a large advantage.
That is why White will get here also a very large per cent of identical successful results against beginners. And against much more strong players!
It maybe, the invention of my traps 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and my approaches (Part 1, Part 2) will cause Mr. Nakamura’s and Mr. Rozman’s wish to replace the standard system of JG into their top tier ‘Legendary’ (on ‘GMHikaru’ YouTube channel).
Contact the author: istinayubukayev@yandex.ru
© 2025 Yury V. Bukayev (Copyright © Bukayev Yury Vyacheslavovich 2025). All rights reserved.
[A legal using of this investigation with a reference to it is permitted and doesn't require author's consent.]
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)