Jerome Gambit: Illogical

I have been reading International Master Erik Kislik's Applying Logic in Chess (2018) and Chess Logic in Practice (2019). It is difficult work, but worth the effort.

The chess coach has convinced me, without mentioning it by name, that playing the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) is illogical.

Kislik has a good sense of chess computer programs (like Stockfish and Komodo) and their evaluations of positions and games. Here is a taste of his insights, should you wish to investigate his books. Consider it a Public Service by this chess blog.

Players often have little idea about the meaning of computer evaluations, so here are some guidelines on how to interpret engine scores. A +.50 advantage (with no tablebase hits) is an objective win a little less than 50% of the time, while a +1.00 advantage wins objectively nearly 80% of the time. +2.00 is closer to 95%, and +3 should be winning in well over 99% of objective cases excluding a major engine error. Hence, +.5 usually refers to a meaningful but non-decisive advantage for White (+/=), while a position that is +/- is at least 70% likely to be objectively winning. In practical games between titled players, if a player obtains a +/- position (often these positions are strategically winning if the reason for the advantage is structural) and can maintain it, the defending side rarely manages to defend perfectly and hold the position if it is at all possible.

I suppose it should be mentioned in this context that Stockfish 15 evaluates the position (30 ply) after  1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ as being just about -4.00.

To quote the International Master and apply his words to the Jerome Gambit, Black "should be winning in well over 99%" of the time.

Oh, well. You have been warned.

Jerome Gambit: A Secret Weapon

 

The latest on YouTube

A video introduction to the Jerome Gambit: A Secret Weapon in the Italian Game: The Jerome Gambit || Chess

Maybe it will convince a few more players to try out the Jerome!

Jerome Gambit: Doggone

 

As Readers of this blog know, I play my slower-time-control Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) games at Chess.com.

I stopped by the site today and discovered a new feature - "Hide Your Homework! The New Dog Bots Are Here".

Players have the opportunity to match their chess skills against dog bots (computer programs) Benji, Wishboy, Buddy Buckets, Pinky, and Ponchik, ranging in rating from 300 to 2600.

I decided to challenge Wishboy, in part because he is described as "the bookish host of a public-access TV show."

(Side note: That pairing of "dog" and "bookish" reminds me of an old Groucho Marx comment, “Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read.”)

Here is our game. It is a light-hearted encounter. Wishboy was a "good boy" and let me win.

perrypawnpusher - Wishboy

casual game, Chess.com, 2023

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

Not for the last time did Wishboy comment, "Dog as my witness, I will never read another book. Chess is way more dramatic!"

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 Qf6

Apparently Wishboy is out of his "book" when it comes to the Jerome Gambit. This move blocks White's Queen from capturing the Rook at h8, but it leaves the Bishop hanging. The Database has 201 games with this move, and White scores 75%.

Whistler's (insert canine joke here) defense 7...Qe7 was stronger.

 8.Qxc5 d6 

Losing the trail of the opening. Some suggestions are 8...Qb6 or 8...c6 or even 8...Qe7 

8...c6 was seen in perrypawnpusher - Saveurking, 3 12 blitz, FICS, 2010 (1-0, 34)

 9.Qe3 

Was I afraid of being bitten? Or was I not paying attention? With Black's Queen at f6, his pawn at c7 was unprotected.

The consistent 9.Qxc7+ was certainly playable: the Database has 47 games, with White scoring 79%.

I was surprised to see that I have shied away before, playing 9.Qc3 in perrypawnpusher - Raankh, 3 12 blitz, FICS, 2010 (1/2 - 1/2, 54). 

9...Kg7 

9...Ne7 was seen in perrypawnpusher - frencheng, 7 5 blitz, FICS, 2010 (1-0, 23) 

10.Nc3 Be6 11.O-O Qe5 

I am not sure of the idea behind this move, or if there even was one. It does pose for me the eternal JeromeGambit question: d-pawn or f-pawn?

12.d4 

Of course the computers prefer 12.f4. 

12...Qh5 13.f4 Re8 14.Qd3 Ne7 

The "Jerome pawns" were ready for 14...Nf6 as well, i.e. 15.e5 Nd5 16.Nxd5 Bxd5 17.c4 Be6 18.d5 Bf5 19.Qd4.

15.d5 Bg4 16.Qd4+ Kh6 

Black's King is in danger wherever it goes, but relatively "safer" was 16...Kg8. 

17.f5+ g5 18.Qf6+ Ng6 19.fxg6 hxg6 

I was fine with the possibility of 19...Rhf8 20.Qxf8+ Rxf8 21.Rxf8 with two Rooks for my Queen.

20.Qd4 

No hurry.

20...Rhf8 21.Bd2 a6 

This tempo loss makes my central pawn push look good.

Of couse, lots of things look good when you are a piece ahead.

 22.Rxf8 Rxf8 23.e5 

23...Qh4 24.e6 Kh5 

The royal couple edges away from home, but there is no safety elsewhere.

25.h3 Qg3 26.Qxg4+ 

I recently re-read my first chess book ever, Chess the Easy Way by Reuben Fine. I am certain that he did not say such a thing, but I came away (again) with the idea that a chess game could be reduced to winning a pawn, then exchanging everything else off, finishing with promoting that pawn to a Queen...

Of course, in this case I have more than an extra pawn.

26...Qxg4 27.hxg4+ Kxg4 

I do not know if Wishboy has the option of resigning, or if the program has to play things out to the bitter end.

28.Rf1 Rc8 29.e7 b6 30.Rf8 Kh5 31.Rxc8 c5 32.dxc6 g4 33.e8=Q Kh4 34.Qe7+ Kg3 35.Rh8 b5 36.Qe3 checkmate

When asked what he thought about the game, Wishboy would probably respond "Ruff".

 

I suspect that the Buddy Buckets is out there waiting for me... 

Anatoly Karpov & Jerome Gambit (Part 8)

 Anatoly Karpov & Jerome Gambit (Part 8)   

  

(by Yury V. Bukayev) 

 

   

The Part 8 of this my work is about wrong Anatoly Karpov (in contrast with the Part 2 and with the Part 6). Thus, it’s a story about my new notable Jerome gambit (JG) game against the well-known (due to his last games against me and not only it) chess amateur Anatoly Karpov, a father of a little boy (my first game against him was shown in the Part 3). This new game was also played in Moscow, approximately one month ago. Moreover, else one my notable game will be considered here in brief.  

 

Thus, after his losses in our previous games Anatoly wanted to prove that he can play strongly and that his knowledge of the standard line (4.Bxf7+) of JG theory and practice can lead him to a win or to a draw. So he suggested me to play again. He asked me to play once more my ‘Anti-Hambleton variation with 9.b4’ (I reminisce, it’s his variant of the name of 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 Qe7 8.Qd5+!? Kg7!? 9.b4, where 9.b4 is a good method to prevent the not good way 9.d4 – the way which was shown in the first GM Aman Hambleton’s video about JG). I have understood that dear Anatoly has prepared to this variation better, and I should choose a new way to avoid his prepared ways. Thus, here is our new game:  

 

 

Bukayev, Yury  –  Karpov, Anatoly (father)   

 

                         rapid, 30+0 

  

 

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 Qe7 8.Qd5+!? Kg7!? 9.b4 Bxb4 10.Bb2+ Nf6 11.0-0 c6 12.Qc4 AN. 

 

This my new strong invented attack leads to a complicated play.  

 

Also, that days in Moscow I have played another rapid game with this “Anti-Hambleton variation” – against my new chess acquaintance Aleksandr Petrov (he has had Black pieces). There I have played else one my new strong invented attack – 12.Qb3 AN. That game has continued: 12…b6? (it’s a “natural” developing move, but it loses) 13.Bxf6+! Kxf6 14.Qb2+ Qe5 15.Qxb4 Qxa1 16.Nc3 c5 17.Qb3 Qxf1+ 18.Kxf1 Bb7 19.Nd5 Bxd5 20.Qxd5 Ke7 21.Qe5+ Kf7 22.Qd6 Rhd8 23.g4, and White (who has almost a winning advantage) won on time. But let’s return to my game against Anatoly. 

 

12…b5? . 

 

This “natural” response is a blunder. Anatoly has made this move immediately, but why? It isn’t difficult to understand it: he confused this position with the position of our previous game (please, look at the Part 7 of this work): 12.Qd4 Bc5 13.Qc4. Thus, in our previous game the possible move 13…b5 could be good, because the blow 14.Bxf6+ was weak: 14…Kxf6 15.Qc3+ Qe5, with the very large Black’s advantage.    

 

13.Bxf6+ . 

 

Of course, it was very easy for me to make this blow, which gives the advantage to White here. Anatoly was shocked a lot, and after five minutes Black solved to resign. Probably, he understood that after 13…Kxf6 14.Qd4+ Qe5 15.Qxb4 the way 15…Qxa1 16.Nc3 Qxf1+! can’t also give him a good chance to defend successfully. But the main cause of his resignation was, of course, the psychological blow: “My first new move is a blunder! It is so terrible!..” 

 

These two new games are very notable, since they develop the Jerome gambit theory strongly! I thank Anatoly and Aleksandr very much!