Jerome Gambit: Just What the Doctor Ordered

I have been ill the last few days, with a fever up to 102 degrees, which is not good for an old brain.

Today I was restless: life on ginger ale and crackers can get pretty boring, fever dreams notwithstanding.

So, after Oooo-ing and Ahhhh-ing over the latest pictures of the grandkids, I decided to again ("Jerome Gambit: Doggone") wander over to the Chess.com website and occupy my mind with another tussle with a cyber version ("Hide Your Homework! The New Dog Bots Are Here") of "man's best friend".

True, Buddy Buckets is rated 1350, and this is hardly a good game, but I was looking for a therapy dog, not a chess lesson (otherwise known as "receiving a beat-down"). Canine kindness prevailed, and Dr. Dog helped lift my spirits.

perrypawnpusher - buddybuckets-dog (c)

casual game, Chess.com, 2023

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Bc5 3.Bc4 Nc6 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Kf6 

The Jerome Gambit is known as a "refuted" opening, but it still helps to know a little theory to combat it. This move, protecting the Knight, is overly optimistic. The Database has 283 games with this position; White scores 79%.

7.Qf5+ Ke7 8.Qxe5+ Kf8 9.Qxc5+ d6 10.Qe3 Bd7 

Take back two sacrificed pieces and call me in the morning.

11.Nc3 Be6 12.O-O c6 13.f4 Bf7 14.d4 Ne7 

Black's play has been too cautious. His King is still in the center, and files will be opened against it.

15.e5 Rc8 16.e6 Bg8 17.f5 h5 

The computer's equivalent of yelling Squirrel! to distract me. 17...h6 or 17...Ke8 were better, but would not have put off Buddy's problems.

The "Jerome pawns" will continue their advance.

18.f6 Ng6 19.e7+ 

It is unfortunate that the best move, now, is 19...Qxe7, giving up the Queen. Black's choice, instead, leads to inescapable mate.

19...Nxe7 20.fxe7+ Ke8 21.exd8=Q+ Kxd8 22.Rf8+ Kd7 23.Rxc8 Kxc8 24.Qe8+ Kc7 25.Bg5 Kb6 26.Bd8+ Ka6 27.Qe2+ b5 28.a4 Rh6 29.axb5+ Kb7 30.Qe7+ Kb8 31.Qc7+ Ka8 32.Qc8 checkmate

Thank you, Buddy Buckets.

Jerome Gambit: Appearances Can Be Deceiving

The following game requires some attention to accurately assess the positions that arise. That is easy for us to do, as readers, but a bit more difficult for the players who were moving at a very rapid rate.

angelcamina - BubbleBabble

1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2023

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 

7.Qd5+ Kf8 8.Qxc5+ d6 9.Qc4 Qf6 

Did Black overlook the loss of the c-pawn, or was he gambitting it? In bullet chess, sometimes it can be hard to tell.

Angelcamina's response shows his assessment.

10.O-O 

Seriously. With 60 seconds thinking time for the game, why even wander into 10.Qxc7 Nh4 11.Rg1 etc.

10...Be6 11.Qxc7  

But now the pawn is worth it? Well, White's King is protected, and Black's d-pawn is not.

By the way, a couple of years ago angelcamina declined the gift: 11.Qb4 b6 12.Nc3 N8e7 13.f4 Kf7 14.f5 Ke8 15.fxe6 Qxe6 16.d3 Ne5 17.Qb5+ c6 18.Qa6 Nc8 19.Qb7 Nd7 20.Qxa8 Ke7 21.Qxc6 a5 White now has a forced checkmate 22.Nd5+ Ke8 23.Nc7+ Ke7 24.Nxe6 Kxe6 25.Qd5+ Ke7 26.Bg5+ Nf6 27.e5 dxe5 28.Qxe5+ Kf7 29.Bxf6 Kg6 30.Bxg7 Re8 31.Qf6+ Kh5 32.Rf5+ White won on time, angelcamina - hosein_1374, lichess.org, 2021.

11...Rc8 12.Qxd6+ N8e7 

An interesting position. 

White has 4 pawns for his sacrificed piece.

Black is far ahead in development, but except for his Rook his pieces don't seem to be attacking anything.

White now buys himself a little trouble by neglecting his c-pawn.

13.f4 

After the game he probably figured 13.Nc3 was better. Or - maybe that he took a risk and it paid off.

13...Rc6 14.Qa3 Bc4 

Instead, 14...Rxc2 led to an equal position.

15.d3 Kf7 16.e5 Qh4 17.dxc4 Nf5 

Again, Black looks like he is doing okay, despite his pawn shortage. Stockfish 15, however, assesses him as being down about a Rook and a piece.

18.Qxa7 Rhc8 19.Qxb7+ R8c7 20.Qb3 Rxc4 21.Nd2 Ne3 

Finally, the White Queen gets some help.

22.Nxc4 Nxf1 23.Nd6+ Ke7 24.Qf7+ Kd8 25.Qe8 checkmate

Jerome Gambit: Time Management

 

I continue to be impressed at how angelcamina at lichess.org regularly turns Jerome Gambit games into 1-minute wins.

The following game is another example, where he averages a little more than one second per move thinking time, but stays ahead of his opponent and brings home the full point.

angelcamina - adrenalin87

1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2023

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 

7.Qd5+ Kf8 8.Qxc5+ d6 9.Qc4 Qe7 

We saw 9...Nf6 in yesterday's game.

10.Nc3

He castled first in angelcamina - Jigsaw71, 1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2021:  10.O-O Nf6 11.Nc3 Be6 12.Qb4 Kf7 13.f4 Bd7 14.d4 Rhf8 15.f5 Nh4 16.Qc4+ Ke8 17.Bg5 Nxf5 18.exf5 c6 19.Rae1 d5 20.Rxe7+ Black resigned, 

10...Be6 11.Qb4 

Or 11.Qa4 Nf6 12.O-O c6 13.f4 Bg4 14.h3 Bh5 15.g4 Nxg4 16.hxg4 Bxg4 17.f5 Ne5 18.d4 Qh4 19.Bf4 Nf3+ 20.Kg2 Qh3+ 21.Kf2 g5 22.fxg6 hxg6 23.Rh1 Qxh1 24.Rxh1 Rxh1 25.e5 d5 26.Qb4+ Kg8 27.Qe7 Rf8 28.Ne2 Nxd4 29.Nxd4 Rxf4+ Black won on time, angelcamina - Anatoliy-64, 1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2022. 

11...Rb8 

Black's Rook takes on the menial task of guarding the b-pawn, while White's Queen remains a bit out of play.

12.O-O Nf6 13.f4 Bd7 14.f5 Ne5 15.d4 Nc6 16.Qc4 

White's "Jerome pawns" are coming to life.

16...h5 17.Bg5 h4 18.Rae1 Re8 19.e5 

Possibly an oversight, but likely premature. 19.Nd5, taking advantage of the pin on the Knight at f6 and the placement of Black's Queen, looks more in tune with the position.

19...dxe5 20.dxe5 Nxe5 21.Qf4 Kf7 22.Nd5 

Now, however, the move has tactical issues.

22...Nxd5 23.Bxe7 Nxf4 24.Rxe5 Rxe7 25.Rxe7+ Kxe7 26.Rxf4 Rf8 

Okay, Black is ahead materially, a piece for a pawn; but how is he doing on the clock? Can White keep him busy until time runs out?

27.f6+ Rxf6 28.Rxh4 Rh6 29.Re4+ Be6 30.Rb4 b6 31.b3 a5 32.Re4 Kd6 33.g3 Rf6 34.Rd4+ Bd5 

A slip that White can take advantage of - but will the simplified position make it easier for Black to defend, despite the loss of material?

35.c4 Re6 36.cxd5 Re5 37.Kf2 Rxd5 38.Rxd5+ Kxd5 

The position is even.

39.Ke3 Kc5 

Taking a step too far from the Kingside. White's pawns there can now advance, which will cause Black's King to scurry over there, which will allow White's King to capture material on the Queenside...

40.Kd3 

Winning chances lay with 40.h4 - and the clock.

40...Kb4 41.Kc2 a4 42.bxa4 Kxa4 

The position is equal. White has an interesting drawing play that includes allowing Black to promote a pawn first: 43.h4 Ka3 44.g4 Kxa2 45.Kc3 Ka3 46.h5 b5 47.g5 b4+ 48.Kc2 Ka2 49.h6 b3+ 50.Kc3 gxh6 51.g6 b2 52.g7 b1/Q 53.g8/Q+ Ka1 54.Qa8+ Qa2 55.Qh1+ Qb1 56.Qa8+ etc draw

43.g4 Kb5 

For the record, 43...g5 would have led to a complicated Queen plus pawns vs Queen plus pawns endgame where time would also be an issue: 44.h4 gxh4 45.g5 h3 45.g6 h2 46.g7 h1/Q 47.g8/Q.

The game continues to be even on the board, but not on the clock.

44.h4 Kc6 45.g5 Kd6 46.Kd3 Ke6 47.Ke4 Kf7 48.Kf5 g6+ 49.Ke5 Ke7 50.Kd5 Kd7 51.Ke5 Ke7 52.Kd5 White won on time

Jerome Gambit: The Temporal Finish Line

When you play the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) in a bullet game, you can win with a devastating attack - or you can cause your opponent so many problems that he takes up so much time calculating that he doesn't make it over the temporal finish line, and loses on time.

It is like that old joke about the large carnivorous beast, which, in this case, is the clock. Can you out-run your opponent?

angelcamina - Javier_Electrico

1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2023

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 

7.Qd5+ Kf8 8.Qxc5+ d6 9.Qc4 Nf6 

White has two pawns for his sacrificed piece. His King is safer. 

Development can be an issue for a few moves, but then the players need to execute a plan.

10.Nc3 c6 11.O-O Qe7 12.d3 Be6 

Black will target the enemy Queen. 

13.Qb4 a5 14.Qb6 Ra6 15.Qe3 Ng4 16.Qg3 h5 17.f4  

A complicated, but balanced position.

The clock now begins to seriously affect play.

17...Ke8 

Too many of his pieces are at risk, and this does not help.

18.h3 Nf6 19.f5 

Or 19.Qxg6+. 

19...Ne5 20.fxe6 h4 

21.Qg6+

A slip neither player noticed.

21...Kd8 22.Qf5 Kc7 23.Bf4 g6 24.Qg5 Rf8 25.Bxe5 dxe5 26.Qxe5+ 

White is back to calling the tune. The Queen will have her say.

26...Kb6 27.Na4+ Ka7 28.Qd4+ b6 29.c4 White won on time

White is better: he has more material, he has central "Jerome pawns", he has two active Rooks (compared to Black's blocked-in rook at a6).

Jerome Gambit: Another Strange and Shocking Opening

I was wandering the internet the other day, when I came upon a rather outrageous and totally unsound gambit that made me think, of course, of my favorite, the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+). 

The line comes out of the Scotch Gambit, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 with 4.Ng5!?.

What?

Of course, Black tried to shoo the pesky Knight away with 4...h6, only to experience 5.Nxf7 - White throwing a piece away, but checkmating before a dozen moves have passed.

Very strange. Very shocking.

I wanted to learn more about the line - for historical purposes, of course.

I found some some light (and light hearted) analysis by Chess Domatio at "Getting Out of the Trap#1: Scotch Gambit Trap" and at two sites by Grandmaster Igor Smirnev, "The Best Chess Opening against 1...e5 | Scotch Gambit Traps" and "Deadly Chess TRAP to Win in 7 Moves! [Works up to 2200 ELO".

The earliest game example with 4.Ng5 that I could find was Johnston, A. - Hosmer, H., 2nd American Chess Congress 1871: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Ng5 Nh6 5.Bc4 Bc5 6.Qh5 Qf6 7.O-O d6 8.h3 Ne5 9.Bb3 Qg6 10.Qh4 f6 11.f4 fxg5 12.fxg5 Nhf7 13.Kh2 Be6 14.Ba4+ Nd7 15.c3 Bc4 16.Rf5 O-O-O 17.Bd1 Nfe5 18.b3 Bd3 19.Bb2 dxc3 20.Nxc3 c6 21.a3 Rdf8 22.b4 Bb6 23.Bg4 Nxg4+ 24.hxg4 Bc7 25.Qf2 d5+ 26.Kh1 dxe4 27.Qxa7 Rxf5 28.gxf5 Qh5+ White resigned

I verified the moves by consulting The Book of the Second American Chess Congress, Cleveland, Ohio, December 1871, by Max Judd (Dubuque, Iowa, 1871).

It is interesting that Johnston played a more mainline variation in the same tournament, Johnston, A.  - Smith, HD, 2nd American Chess Congress 1871: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 Bc5 5.Ng5 (Sarratt Attack, at least as old as Sarratt - NN, London, 1818) Nh6 6.Qh5 O-O 7.Bxf7+ Rxf7 8.Nxf7 Nxf7 9.Qxc5 d6 10.Qc4 Qe7 11.Qe2 Nfe5 12.O-O Be6 13.Na3 Rf8 14.f4 Bg4 15.Qb5 Ng6 16.Qxb7 Qxe4 17.Qb3+ Kh8 18.Qg3 Bf5 19.Qf3 Qe8 20.Bd2 Be4 21.Qg3 Nce7 22.Rae1 d5 23.f5 Nxf5 24.Qxc7 Ngh4 25.Rf2 Qg6 26.Qg3 Qe8 27.Qh3 h6 28.g4 Qg6 29.Rxe4 dxe4 30.Kh1 e3 31.Rxf5 Nxf5 32.gxf5 Qc6+ 33.Kg1 exd2 34.Qd3 Rxf5 35.Qxd2 Qg6+ White resigned

Was 5.Ng5 against Hosmer a fingerfehler?

Why mention an opening from a game over 150 years ago, that White lost, and that nobody plays these days?

It is an interesting coincidence that Johnston was at one time a member of the Cincinnati Chess Club, as was S. A. Charles, who wrote opening analyses, first for the Cincinnati Commercial Gazette, then later for the Pittsburgh Telegraph, including an examination of the Jerome Gambit; and J.W. Miller, who published Cook's Synopsis of Chess Openings A Tabular Analysis by William Cook, With American Inventions in the Openings and Fresh Analysis since 1882, which also contained analysis of the Jerome Gambit.

Besides, it is not quite accurate that nobody today plays 5.Ng5!? In fact, lichess.org has 869,324 (!) games with that move, with White scoring a decent 56%. Also, the site has 260,399 games with 5.Ng5!? h6 6.Nxf7!?, with White scoring an impressive 73%.

Something to consider in your next blitz game, if you decide to bypass the Jerome...

Jerome Gambit: First The Idea Arrives...

When I am playing blitz, I noticed that first an idea for a move arrives, then I evaluate it.

Only, sometimes I don't evaluate, I just play the move, because it feels right.

That is certainly a time-saving practice that I sometimes get away with, and sometimes not. I can not recommend it to others.

Think first, then evaluate, then play the move.

 

perrypawnpusher - GuestHTXV

5 5 blitz, FICS, 2023

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 

7.Qd5+ Kf8 

For 7...Ke8, see perrypawnpusher - Lark, 2 12 blitz, FICS, 2009 (1-0, 59)

8.Qxc5+ Qe7 9.Qe3 

9.Qxc7 is too dangerous for White because of 9...Qxe4+. It certainly did not feel right.

9...Nf6

Or 9...d5 as seen in perrypawnpusher - marbleschess, 10 0 blitz, FICS, 2009 (1-0, 26) 

10.Nc3 

10.d3 was played in perrypawnpusher - hogmaster, Jerome Gambit 3 thematic tournament, ChessWorld.net 2008 (1-0, 37) and perrypawnpusher - pfink, 10 0 blitz, FICS, 2009 (1-0, 25) 

10...c6

Stronger was 10...d5 as in perrypawnpusher - jjdd57, Piano Piano tournement, Chess.com, 2021 (1-0, 56). 

11.d4 Kf7 

Preparing to castle-by-hand.

12.O-O Rf8 13.f4 Kg8 

What do you think?

White has two pawns for a piece, and a strong pawn center. I was happy with my position. After the game, Stockfish rated White a little less than a pawn better. 

14.f5 Nh8 15.e5 Nd5 

I expected the consistent defensive move 15...Ne8.

In the post mortem Stockfish 15.1 suggested 15...d5 with an edge to White.

16.Qg3 

I did not want to spend a move on 16.Nxd5 and I was not stressed by the idea of Black exchanging Knights on c3 (his best response). I did know where I wanted my Queen to go.

16...Nf7 

Activating the cornered Knight - a good idea in the abstract, but flawed in this particular case.

17.f6 

The proper response. 

17...Nxf6 

Giving back some of the sacrificed material, but it is too late.

18.exf6 g6

Protecting against mate at g7, but costing the Queen. ("Best" was giving up Her Majesty with 18...Qxf6)

19.fxe7 

Here my opponent had about 5 1/2 minutes left on his clock, and he let it run. I figured he preferred to lose on time instead of resigning. However, when about half of the time had run off, he disconected, which led to a forfeit.

Lei Tingjie Has Beaten Ju Wenjun in Game 5 of the Women’s World Chess Championship Match with the Italian Game

Lei Tingjie Has Beaten Ju Wenjun in Game 5 of the Women’s World Chess Championship Match with the Italian Game 

 (by Yury V. Bukayev) 

 

Let’s analyse the early opening stage of the today’s main chess game GM Lei Tingjie – GM Ju Wenjun (Game 5: https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=2537229 ): 

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.d3 Bc5 

This sequence is very popular among top chess players in the modern time, but I don’t recommend both 4.d3?! and 4…Bc5?!, if you want to make the best move. Thus, after 4…Be7! White doesn’t have an advantage. 

5.0-0 

I don’t recommend to play 5.0-0?!, I recommend to play 5.Nc3!, and White gets an advantage (here are my old analytical researches on it, by transposition of moves: https://chessproblem.my-free-games.com/chess/games/ChessArticle.php?art=C50A , https://chessproblem.my-free-games.com/chess/games/ChessArticle.php?art=C50B ). 

5…d6 6.c3 a5 7.Bb3 

I don’t recommend to play 7.Bb3?!, to play both 6…a5?! and 6…a6?!. Thus, after 7.d4! AN White gets an advantage (here is my old analytical research on it after 6…a6, by transposition of moves: https://chessproblem.my-free-games.com/chess/games/ChessArticle.php?art=C54A , the situation after 6…a5 is analogous to it). 

It maybe, Ms. Lei Tingjie has known about my idea 7.d4!, but reminisced Game 3 of this Match (the Anti-Berlin system of the Spanish Opening), where she blundered a pawn on e4 after her move d3-d4, after her mistaken play. In Game 3 I recommend the way 8.Ba4! AN with the continuation 9.Qe2!, 10.0-0-0! (the same is also good after 8.Bc4!? AN), analogously to my old analytical research ( https://chessproblem.my-free-games.com/chess/games/ChessArticle.php?art=C54B ), instead of her way 8.Bxc6 bxc6 9.d4. Of course, the position of that game differs a lot, but this psychology could work today. 

And let me finish this research. I can’t exclude that the way 3…Nf6 4.d3 Bc5 was chosen by the Women’s World Champion instead of 3…Bc5 to prevent some sharp systems including strong and other systems which can be found on this famous blog. I would recommend the Women's World Champion Ms. Ju Wenjun to not be sad and to choose more strong and more aggressive opening systems in this Match further, although the result of Game 5 wasn’t a consequence of its early opening stage. 

Contact the author:  istinayubukayev@yandex.ru     

© 2023 Yury V. Bukayev (Copyright © Bukayev Yury Vyacheslavovich 2023). All rights reserved.  

[A legal using of this investigation with a reference to it is permitted   and doesn’t require author’s consent.]