Jerome Gambit Book (Part 3)

                                                   

Regarding the newly discovered Jerome Gambit book, questions remain.

It is not unusual for two games to have the same moves, especially if they are short games. For example, how many thousands of times has the following game been played? 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Qh5 Nf6 4.Qxf7 checkmate.

So, it might not be odd for two games to mirror each other for 10 moves.

But, for 24 moves? That happens.

Okay, but for 39 moves? Surely that can't happen too often.

Consider the following game (s) from the Jerome Gambit book that we have been discussing (see "Jerome Gambit Book (Parts 1 & 2)". They can be found in the notes to the online rapid game Lovefully (2712) - BLITZ26 (2481), 2021 in the book.

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 7.Qd5+ Ke8 8.Qxc5 d6 9.Qe3 Nf6 

Here, Lovefully veered off with 10.d3 against BLITZ26.

10.d4 Qe7 11.0-0 Ng4 12.Qe2 Qh4 13.h3 Nf6 14.f4 Nh5 15.Qf2 Qxf2+ 16.Rxf2 Rf8 17.f5 Ne7 18.c4 c6 19.g4 Nf6 20.Nc3 d5 21.e5 Nd7 22.cxd5 Nxd5 23.Ne4 N7b6 24.b3 a5 

At this point, the book had the notation "1-0 (72) Charmeteau,S (2292) - Guichard,P (2430) FRA-chT Top 12 2019 (7.6)" indicating that this game also went on to 72 moves.

25.e6 h6 26.Bb2 Ke7 27.Re1 Ra7 28.Nc5 Na8 29.Nd3 b5 30.Ne5 Kd6 31.Rc1 Ra6 32.Rc5 Bb7 33.Rfc2 Rc8 34.Bc1 a4 35.b4 a3 36.Bd2 Nab6 37.Be1 Na4 38.Bg3 Ke7 39.Nd7 Nxc5 

Here, there was the notation "1-0 (72) Deloras,B - Walker,M EST-ch Tallinn 1943" indicating the game length, too, was 72 moves.

40.dxc5 Rg8 41.Bd6+ Ke8 42.Rd2 Ra4 43.Rxd5 cxd5 44.f6 gxf6 45.Nxf6+ Kd8 46.e7+ Kc8 47.Nxg8 Bc6 48.Nf6 Rxb4 49.e8Q+ Bxe8 50.Nxe8 Rb1+ 51.Kf2 Rb2+ 52.Kf3 Rxa2 53.Nc7 b4 54.Nxd5 b3 

Jerome Gambit identified this as a win by White, in Charlick,H - Mann,J correspondence, 1881 - which it was, although the game also went on to 72 moves. 

In addition:

It turns out that Sven Charmeteau did play - Pauline Guichard in the  FRA-chT Top 12 tournament in Brest, France, in 2019, but their game was a Scotch, not a Jerome.

The only tournament that I could find to match "EST-ch Tallinn 1943" was the 11th Estonian Championship in Tallinn in July, 1943 (Di Felice, Chess Results, 1941-1946, page 126). The tournament was won by Paul Keres, and neither Deloras nor Walker were listed as playing.

Puzzling...

Jerome Gambit Book (Part 2)

[continued]

Examining the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) book (the cover says it is by "Chess Notes") that Bill Wall led me to, and which I first took a look at in "Jerome Gambit Book (Part 1)", has led to more puzzlement.

As mentioned in the earlier post, the following game from the book features "W So" playing the Jerome Gambit against "Delmonico" in the "N Eljanov Memorial final 6th 2021".

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5 +Kd6 8.f4 Qf6 9.fxe5+ Qxe5 10.Qf3 Nf6 11.d3 Kc6 12.Nc3 d6 13.h3 Qh5 14.Qg3 Be6 15.Ne2 Raf8 16.Nf4 Qe5 17.Qxg7 Bf5 18.Nd5 Nxd5 19.Qxe5 dxe5 20.exd5+ Kxd5 21.Bh6 Rf7 22.g4 Be6 23.O-O-O 

I suspect that if the reference is to Wesley So, an American grandmaster rated over 2750, if he had played a Jerome Gambit it would be notable, and it would have been covered on chess sites all over the internet - yet that has not happened. (Especially since Stockfish 16.1 assesses the final position as about 4 1/4 pawns better for Black.) I have messaged Mr. So about this, and will share his response.

Also, a search on the internet did not discover an "N Eljanov" or an "N Eljanov Memorial" tournament in any year, not just 2021. Ditto, checking Mark Crowther's comprehensive "The Week in Chess" website.

There is a Nils Delmonico, from Switzerland, but, again, had he beaten a top grandmaster who was playing a "refuted" opening, it would have been news. Likewise, any other Delmonico-named chess player. No news found.

Finally as previously noted, all of the moves are the same as in the game Alonzo Wheeler Jerome - S. A. Charles, correspondence, 1881.

Well, then...

[to be continued]

Jerome Gambit: Blackburne Returns

 

I just heard from Pete Banks ("blackburne" online), early and longtime contributor to this blog and early member of the Jerome Gambit Gemeinde (modern). 

He pointed out the video "Hikaru Is CRAZY! Sacs 2 Pieces In First 5 Moves & Annihilates 2600+ GM!" covering the game GM Nakamura - GM Kollars 3 0 blitz, Chess.com, 2020 (1-0, 28).

Previously, we have seen a wordless presentation of that game (see "Once Again: "Grandmasters Don't Play the Jerome Gambit" Blah, Blah, Blah!") but the video Pete mentions, by Square One Chess has excited narration that brings the game further to life.

Well worth checking out.

By the way, longtime readers of this blog are well aware of Pete, and might well remember 

- when International Master Gary Lane assessed the game Banks - Karmark, internet, 2007

- when he was mentioned in John Elburg's review of Gary Lane's The greatest ever chess tricks and traps (see "The extraordinary and forgotten Jerome Gambit")

- see "The Pete Banks Annotated Collection"

Jerome Gambit: Book (Part 1)

 

Bill Wall, whose games and comments have graced many posts on this blog, recently informed me of a book on the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) at archive.org.

It is a 61-page tome, in PDF form.

It is also a bit of a head-scratcher. 

The cover indicates the book is by "Chess Notes", although the first of that name that comes to mind is Edward Winter's "Chess Notes" - and I seriously doubt that this is Winter's work. I have emailed him about this, and will share his response. 

Many of the notes to the games within are by "Kitty Kat", otherwise unidentified. A Chess.com robot entity? I don't know.

Fortunately, none of my games are included, but it is odd that none of Bill's games are included, either.

There are games that do not appear in The Database, so I will have to update it.

One game given in the notes is a bit of a puzzler: 

So,W-Delmonico, N Eljanov Memorial final 6th 2021

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5  4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5  6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 Qf6  9.fxe5+ Qxe5 10.Qf3 Nf6 11.d3 Kc6  12.Nc3 d6 13.h3 Qh5 14.Qg3 Be6 15.Ne2 Raf8 16.Nf4 Qe5 17.Qxg7  Bf5 18.Nd5 Nxd5 19.Qxe5 dxe5 20.exd5+ Kxd5 (23)

The same moves appear in The Database, in 

Jerome,Alonzo W. - Charles,S.A., correspondence, 1881

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 Qf6 9.fxe5+ Qxe5 10.Qf3 Nf6 11.d3 Kc6 12.Nc3 d6 13.h3 Qh5 14.Qg3 Be6 15.Ne2 Raf8 16.Nf4 Qe5 17.Qxg7 Bf5 18.Nd5 Nxd5 19.Qxe5 dxe5 20.exd5+ Kxd5 21.Bh6 Rf7 22.g4 Be6 23.O-O-O Rf3

I suppose I should check with Wesley So about his Jerome Gambit adventures.

A deeper look into the book will follow.

[to be continued]

Jerome Gambit: Video and Burning Bridges

 Wow.

I just bumped into a Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) video ("Chess Openings #15 - Jerome Gambit") by @Chess_Thugs, who has a number of chess video on YouTube.

It is relevant to this blog to consider the following assessment.

The Jerome Gambit is a gambit not of a pawn, but of the entire game. This opening was probably born because some trash 700 ELO player confused the fried liver with this and tried it anyway. Although it seems like white will get the piece back and enjoy a bad but existing attack, black can simply protect the piece with his king and refused [sic] to give it away. 

It is true, that the Jerome is not a gambit of a pawn, but, rather two pieces, one of which White sometimes can claw back.

I do very much like the opinion that the opening is actually a gambit "of the entire game". Playing the Jerome Gambit requires you to be all in, even if it means burning your bridges behind you, as there is no going back.

While I do not know exactly how strong Alonzo Wheeler Jerome (after whom the gambit is named) was (see "How Strong A Player Was Giovanni Tonetti?") it is clear from his games and analyses that he was rated higher than 700 (although the ELO system was not in existance back then).

It is hard to not share Chess Grand Monkey's online look at various ratings (check it out!), including "How good is a 700 chess rating?" and the following diagram

How good is a 700 chess rating?

An elo rating of 700 in chess means that you kind of know what you’re doing! You’re still considered a new player, but you do know all the chess rules. And you probably recognize some opnings already. But there’s a lot of room for improvement!

Chess rating (elo)	Level	How you play
< 800	Novice	You hang your queen 4 times per game
800 – 1099	Beginner	You play pretty well and then you blunder your queen You know only 2 openings.
1100 – 1399	Intermediate	You can play all the common openings, but you blunder forks when you get tired.
1400 – 1699	Advanced intermediate	You don’t blunder pieces away anymore. Ifyou lose it’s because you played inaccurately and you lost a pawn.
1700 – 1999	Advanced	People need to come at you with very challenging positions if they want you to make an inaccuracy.
2000 – 2299	Expert	You hold your own in almost any position. Your biggest enemies are stress and fatigue.

Table: what your chess elo rating really means (based on ratings on Chess.com)

Again, I enjoy @Chess_Thugs' comment that the Jerome Gambit leads to "a bad but existing attack", he is a bit inaccurate when asserting

...[B]lack can simply protect the piece with his king and refused [sic] to give it away. 

in light of the main line 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4, when Black's best move, according to Stockfish 16.1, is to have his King step away from defending the beleagured Knight, with 8...Kc6, giving it away. 

All-in-all, I appreciate the criticism, as it forces me to examine and re-examine my favorite opening.

Just Make Good Moves

The following blitz game, sent to me by SUPREMEAPAP, is wild.

I remember, years ago, reading that a Master shared that he doesn't bother with deep analysis when playing against a much weaker opponent, he just makes good moves and waits for the mistakes to come. 

SUPREMEAPAP - NN

3 2 blitz, Chess.com, 2025

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Bxf7+ 

Most recently seen in the post "Keep Things Complicated"

4...Kxf7 5. Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.d4 Nxe4 

With aggression in mind. Milder was 6...Ng6.

7.dxe5 Qh4 

Black's Queen move looks scary, especially in a 3-minute game. Still, 7...d5 was for choice. 

8.Qf3+ 

Is this move good? Is it bad? Does it matter?

Sometimes, when you get an idea in your head, you play it.

An alternative is 8.g3 Qe7 9.Qd5+ Qe6 10.Qxe4 d5.

8...Kg8 

See what I mean? Play something scary, and your opponent might jump. The King is in danger? Seek shelter! It is not readily apparent - and in 3-minute games, players seek out the readily apparent - that 8...Kg6 is best, and keeps Black better. 

9.g3 

White kicks the Queen, driving her back, maintaining White's advantage. Good idea, but missing 9.Qb3+ d5 10.Qxd5+ Be6 11.Qxe6 checkmate.

Again: After this move, White is still better, but... 

9...Ng5 

The old maxim, If your opponent attacks your piece, you may not need to move it, if you can, instead, attack one of your opponent's important pieces, is often helpful, especially in quick games, but following it can be risky if it misses concrete threats.

10.Qxf8+ 

If the Queen goes, she will take a piece with her; and then White can capture Black's Queen.

If she were not playing at breakneck speed, she would have seen to move her Queen with check, 10.Qb3+ d5 11.gxh4.

10...Kxf8 11.gxh4 

After Black collects the e-pawn, he will have an edge, due to pawn structure.

11...Nf3+ 12.Ke2 Nxe5 13.Bf4 d6 14.Bxe5 

Simple positions can be easier to play, and here, the stronger player expects to outplay the weaker player.

14...dxe5 15.Nc3 Ke7 16.Rad1 Ke6 17.Rhg1 g6 18.Nb5 

18...Bd7 

Ouch. Clock? Nerves?

19.Nxc7+ Kf5 20.Nxa8 Bb5+ 21.Ke3 Rxa8 

White is up the exchange and a pawn, and "only" needs to find a plan and execute it - ahead of the clock.

22.Rd5 Bc6 23.Rc5 Rd8 24.Rg5+ Kf6 25.Rgxe5 h5 26.Rg5 Rd1

27.Rc4 Re1+ 28.Kd2 Re8 29.Rf4+ Kg7 30.c3 a6 31.a3 Bb5 32.a4 Bc6 

I don't know for sure, but I suspect that White played the last 10 moves very rapidly, to accumulate some of the 2-second increments per move, to ease time pressure.

33.b3 Be4 34.Ke3 

Allowing a discovered check, but it really doesn't matter.

34...Bc2+ 35.Kd4 Bxb3 36.a5 Bd1 

And now it is time to coordinate the White Rooks and go for checkmate.

37.Rc5 Rd8+ 38.Ke3 Re8+ 39.Re4 Rf8 40.Rc7+ Kg8 41.Ree7 Bb3

42.Rg7+ Kh8 43.Rh7+ Kg8 44.Rcg7 checkmate 

Keep Things Complicated

Here is another game from SUPREMEAPAP, showing the value of keeping the game complicated - uncomfortable for the opponent.

The defender might well have asked himself - At what point did I lose control of the game?

SUPREMEAPAP - NN

3 2 blitz, Chess.com, 2025

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Bxf7+ 

Although this line of play does not seem to have a name, I have classified it as a Jerome-Knight gambit. See "Jerome-Knightmare" and, especially, "Jerome Gambit: Review of the Jerome-Knight Gambit". 

4...Kxf7 5. Nxe5+ 

A historical reference: here 5.Qe2 was played in Draper, Dr - Child, AW., Belfast - Dublin team correspondence match-2 1891-2 (0-1, 20) 

5... Nxe5 6.d4 Ng6  

White has given up two pieces for two pawns - but those pawns can become troublesome, especially in a 3-minute game.

7.e5 Nd5 

Like in the Jerome Gambit proper, White is going to win back some material, so to be considered here is 7...d5 8.exf6 Qxf6, and Black is still better.

8.Qf3+ Ke8 9.Qxd5 Ne7 

Kicking the enemy Queen, always attractive. 

10.Qe4 d5 11.Qh4 

Interesting. 11.exd6 Qxd6 would have opened Black's position a little more, not in line with White's plans or chances.

11...g6 

This weakens f6, and is immediately responded to.

12.Bg5 Qd7 13.Nc3 Bg7 14.O-O 

There was a pawn to be had with 14.Bxe7 Qxe7 15.Qxe7+ Kxe7 16.Nxd5, but White wants to retain her Queen for attacking chances.

14...Nf5 

15.Qf4 Rf8 16.Rfe1 Qe6 17.Nb5 

17...Qe7 

Ack! In keeping the position complicated and relying upon assistance of the clock,White is rewarded with this slip.

18.Bxe7 Nxe7 19.Qd2 Kf7 20.Nxc7 Rb8 21.e6+ Kg8 

Black's King has found safety. If he can capture White's advanced Knight, he would have 3 pieces for his Queen, and maybe...

Not going to happen.

22.Qg5 Nf5 23.Nxd5 Bf6 

Okay, the clock or panic, it doesn't matter any more.

24.Nxf6+ Kg7 

25.Nd7 

Forcing another exchange and advancing his passed pawn. 

It is not necessary to realize that White has a checkmate in 13 here - it is enough to find a winning way.

25...Bxd7 26.exd7 b6 27.g4 

Relentless.

27...Nxd4 28.Re7+ Kg8 29.Qd5+ Kh8 30.Qxd4+ Kg8 31.Qg7 checkmate