Jerome Gambit: Coach (Part 1)

Many years ago, I helped start a few chess clubs in local elementary schools. I made it a practice when I played a student to do a quick assessment of his or her skill level, and then adjust my own play to slightly below theirs - so that paying attention and being careful would bring them a win against me, but sloppiness would not. I was pleased to lose quite a few games.

Recently I decided to introduce the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.BXf7+) to the Chess.com bot Coach Mae. I was surprised to find that the Coach used some of my own coaching strategies in our game.

Coach Mae's comments are in purple. I have added diagrams and a few comments of my own.

perrypawnpusher - Coach Mae bot

Chess.com, 2023

1.e4 

1.e4 can lead to fun, tactical games. 

1...e5 

1.e4 e5, one of the most common ways to start a chess game.

2.Nf3 

Hmm, how should I defend my pawn?

2...Nc6

Let's try the classic, solid Nc6. 

3.Bc4

You've pointed your bishop at my weakest point, the f7 square.

3...Bc5 

The Giuoco Piano. The center is getting quite tense.

4.Bxf7+ 

In the opening, once you move a piece, you should focus on your other pieces.

Somewhat more polite than International Master Eric Rosen's reaction to the Jerome: What is this garbage? 

4...Kxf7 

My king is safe...for now.

5.Nxe5+ 

Hmm... That's an interesting move! 

That sounds like the chess equivalent of Well isn't that special?

5...Nxe5

And of course I take back!

6.Qh5+

You forked me! Nicely spotted.

6...Ke6 

Defending my knight. 

7.Qf5+ 

What an active queen.

The Coach is trying hard to be supportive.

7...Kd6 

What's the best way to kick one of my pieces away?

 8.f4

Great! You're making me dance.

Or ROFL.

8...Qh4+ 

You have something here, I can feel it.

A lost game?

First appearance of this check was in the imaginary telephone chess game between R.F and Nibs, presented in the June 1889 American Chess Magazine.

9.g3

That's the way. Your pawn mightily defends your king - and attacks the attacker! That was the move you needed to play. 

9...Qf6 

Shall we trade?

10.fxe5+ 

Stay away from my queen.

10...Qxe5

How dare you threaten my king.

Here Black resigned in perrypawnpusher - Langan, 8 0 blitz, FICS, 2009  

[to be continued]

Jerome Gambit: What Is This Garbage?

Here is a link to a Jerome Gambit video by International Master Eric Rosen titled "Jerome Gambit Gone Wrong (kind of)". 

About a year and a half ago ("Jerome Gambit: Recent Videos") I posted the link, but without the title of the video, just the url.

By the way, "Jerome Gambit: What Is This Garbage?" is also the name of a light-hearted post from little over a year ago.

And if you search this blog for other examples of the word "garbage" you are likely to run into the post "Jerome Gambit: First There Is The Confusion Factor" which has this sage reflection

I am reading IM Sam Collins' Gambit Busters (Everyman Chess, 2010) with a know-your-enemy focus, and enjoyed the following, from the chapter "Escaping the Defensive Mindset"

It is well known that club players, typically, go to pieces when confronted by a gambit. Of course, for every player there are some gambit lines which they know, and perhaps their theoretical knowledge will suffice to get them to a safe position. But this won't be the case when they are confronted by an established gambit they don't know, an unusual or forgotten gambit, or where their opponent deviates from theory.  

To my mind, gambits are the situations where there is the single biggest gap between passively looking at a position at home, and facing something over the board. Skimming over an opening variation with a cup of tea, maybe Rybka muttering in the background, it all looks so straightforward - an "=" symbol (or something even more favourable), a bunch of crisp responses demonstrating the intellectual failure of our opponent's adventure. 

But at the board, things are rather different. First, there is the confusion factor...

Jerome Gambit: Gambit Duel (Part 4)

 

[continued from the previous post]

wgraif (2525) - EricRosen (2591)

3 0 blitz, lichess.org, 2022

As the clocks tick down, the players scramble, intent on only one outcome.

38...Rxb2 39.Re7 Kf6 40.Rc7 Rb3 41.Kf2 Rxa3 42.Rxb7 Rxc3 43.Ra7 a3 44.Ra6 Kf5   

45.Kg3 

I have to laugh, here. Stockfish looks askance at the Jerome Gambit in general, and it often seems that it seeks out as "best" a line for White is a draw, even when White is better.

So, here it suggests 45.h4, because, I have to assume, then Black can play 45...Rc2+ and have a draw after 46.Ke3 Rc3+ 47.Kf2 Rc3+ etc.

45...Ke6 46.Kf4 Rd3 47.Kg3 Kf5 48.Rxc6 Rxd4 49.Ra6 Rd3

50.Kh4

Here the silicon wise guy suggests that 50.h4 was the best way forward. Of course, looking at a million positions a second, it would think that.

White's Kingside activity will ultimately prove unsuccessful.

 50...Rd2 51.g4+ Kf4 52.Ra4+ Kxf3 53.h3 Rd3 54.Kg5 Ke2 55.h4 d4 56.Kg6 Rb3 57.Kxg7 d3 58.g5 d2  59.Rd4 Re3 60.g6 Rd3 61.Re4+ Kf3 62.Kh7 d1Q

Only the clock can save White now. That is not to be.

63.g7 Rd7 64.Kh8  Kxe4  65.g8Q Rd8 66.Kh7 Rxg8 67.Kxg8 Qh5 68.Kg7 Qxh4  69.Kf7 a2 70.Kf8  a1Q 71.Kf7 Qd4 72.Kf8 Qg1 73.Kf7 Kf3 74.Ke8 Kg2 75.Kd7 Kh1 76.Kc7 Qhg3+ 77.Kc6 Qf3+ 78.Kd7 Qgf2 79.Kc7 Q2e2 80.Kd7 Qfd3+ 81.Kc7 Qec2+ 82.Kb8 Qa3 83.Kb7 Qab3+ 84.Ka8 Qca2 checkmate

Wow. Thank you FM Graif and IM Rosen!

Jerome Gambit: Gambit Duel (Part 2)

 

[continued from the previous post]

wgraif (2525) - EricRosen (2591)

3 0 blitz, lichess.org, 2022

The Jerome Gambit game fits in well in the "Gambit Duel" between National Master William Graif and International Master Eric Rosen.

12.Bg5    

This is a standard idea in the Jerome: pressure on the Knight at f6. There will be risks in making the capture, however, as the game proceeds.

12...Kf7 13.Rad1

White wants to be able to play d2-d4 to block out the enemy Bishop, in order to be able to play f2-f4. This idea is complicated by the fact that once the d-pawn moves, the e-pawn will be unprotected, so that pawn, in turn, will need protection.

In retrospect, White might have looked at Ka1, at some point, unpinning his f-pawn, instead.

13...Bd4 14.Ne2 Bb6  

14...Bxb2 was probably playable, but it would have been a distraction from the plan Black was putting together, and the time spent on working through the complications - 15.Rb1 h4!? (15...Ba3 16.Nf4!?) 16.Bxh4 Nh5 17.Qe3 Bf6 18.Bxf6 Nxf6 19.Rxb7 Rxh2!? 20.Rfb1 was not necessary at this point.

15.Qh4

Protecting the e-pawn (with additional pressure on f6), according to plan.

15...Rag8 16.d4 d5 17.f3 c6 

White has played d3-d4, and reinforced his e-pawn with the modest f2-f3. He has pressure on the Knight at f6, and Black would love to see the Bishop exchanged so that he could recapture with the pawn and open the g-file for his Rook.

18.Kh1  Ke8

Nothing sharp, for the moment.

The computer suggests 18...Nh7, with the idea 19.Nf4 Nxg5 20.Qxg5 g6 21.Nd3 when White intends to plant his Knight on e5. Still, Black would be better.

19.Nf4 Bf7

NM Rosen would like to keep White's Knight off of g6.

It is interesting that Stockfish 15 is not concerned about the possible loss of the exchange: it sees 19...Bc7 20.Ng6 Nh7 21.Nxh8 Rxh8 22.Qxh5+ Qf7 as equal.

"Equal" would not be bad for White at this point, although after the text move the computer evaluates White as being more than a Rook better.

Can you see what White has after the text move?

20.e5 Bd8 21.e6 

NM Graif was happy to play this move. I think I would have gone for the more pedestriant 21.exf6 - although, of course, I would never have reached this position against an International Master.

[to be continued]

Jerome Gambit: Gambit Duel (Part 1)

 

I recently learned (thank you, Dan) of a 3-minute Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) game played at lichess.org between wgraif (2525) and EricRosen (2591).

Although the game was ultimately won by Black on move 84, the play was complicated and very interesting; and White certainly had his chances.

By the way, International Master Eric Rosen is known for his interest in unusual chess openings, especially the Stafford Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 Nc6). His videos can be found on YouTube, and he streams on Twitch.

National Master William Graif also streams on Twitch, where you can find a few videos highlighting his "Gambit Duel" with IM Rosen. The two players are clearly having fun - starting with the use of a "gambit wheel" which spins to choose the opening to be played.

Their Jerome Gambit game can be seen at about 26:22, where NM Graif opines accurately "A fan favorite. It has to be the most dubious line here."

wgraif (2525) - EricRosen (2591)

3 0 blitz, lichess.org, 2022

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Kf8 

It is interesting that the lichess.org computer, in its brief analysis, gives Black's move a "?", preferring 6...Ke6. From a silicon point of view, that might be correct, but in human vs human play 6...Kf8 is just fine.

The Database notes that in 1,850 games with 6...Kf8, Black scores 52%; while in 2,775 games with 6...Ke6, Black scores 45%. (All warnings about statistics should be heeded, but the numbers are included here to suggest that the computer's argument is not the only one available.)

7.Qxe5 d6

The computer labels this move an "inaccuracy", suggesting that 7...d5 was best. This is a very good point. The Database has only 4 games with 7...d5, with Black scoring 75%.

I have previously mentioned (see "Jerome Gambit: More Recent Videos") the video "Everything You Should Know About the Jerome Gambit" by GM Cemil Can Ali Marandi. The grandmaster is worth quoting

...[I]n this video I would like to analyze the Jerome Gambit for you guys. You might have heard about the Jerome Gambit and I would like to make sure that everybody understands the ideas behind this gambit and how you should actually proceed. The Jerome Gambit is becoming very popular lately, but you have to kind of understand that this is obviously not the right way to play the game of chess. If you're looking for something which is entertaining, if you're looking for interesting sacrifice right off the bat in the opening this is a gambit for you but it's only for educational and fun purposes. It is really not good for a regular classical game or and over-the-board practice...

The grandmaster's comment on 7...d5 is also educational. After pointing out that "The king is very safe on f8", when he gets to Black's 7th move  

...[T]he best move is 7...d5. The reason is when you're up in development advantage, in this case Black is up in development advantage and he's also a piece up, the idea is to open up as many files as many diagonals as possible toward the enemy King. So White can't really go for the Queen trade. What he can go for is he can take the pawn 8.exd5 but this has its own disadvantage as well because you can realize that White has only played with his Queen and his pawn so far, because he just lost two of his pieces, which he developed earlier, so now Black has to somewhat try to start an attack on this weakened White King...

...and after a move like 7...d5 White obviously doesn't want to trade the Queens because in this position if you trade the Queens, well now Black is simply a piece up and he will be winning the game very easily. Therefore, trading queens when you are attacking, especially down a piece, is generally not a good thing...   

8.Qg3 Nf6 9.Nc3 Be6 10.0–0 Qd7 11.d3 h5    

White has 2 pawns for his sacrificed piece. He is behind in development, and has to deal with the annoying dark square Bishop on c5.

NM Graif makes an interesting comment during the game, that one problem with the Jerome Gambit is that the pawns get in the way of the Rooks. In fact, his next move is designed to physically impede a pawn which will be in front of a Rook that wants to attack White's King...

[to be continued]

Jerome Gambit: IM Eric Rosen's Video

 

Yury Bukayev informed me that IM Eric Rosen's new YouTube video, titled "Winning as Quickly as Possible with TRICKY Gambits" contains a new Jerome Gambit miniature.

IM Rosen tries the Jerome "just for the LOLs" and wins before he even realizes it. 

Just like the Jerome.

Jerome and Stafford Gambits: Spiritual Cousins

I have been exchanging emails with Dan Middlemiss, who is kind of partial to the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) as White, but who is deeply committed to the Stafford Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 Nc6) as Black.

Although I am mostly familiar with the "reversed Stafford Gambit" - the Boden-Kiesertizky Gambit - (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4 4.Nc3) - I think he has a very strong case to make.

What strikes me as a candidate for a possible future blog by you, is the striking similarity between the Jerome and the Stafford gambits. Both feature an early sortie by King‘s Bishop and both target the vulnerable King Bishop’s pawn, often coupled with the early developing move by KB Knight. One key difference, however, is that in the Stafford only a pawn is being sacrificed, at least initially. Another real departure is that an early copycat move by white with Bc4 brings disaster upon white...

 I am also struck by the extent to which the Jerome Gambit shares many of the same attacking features as the now popular Stafford Gambit played by black in the Petrov Defence. Some quite striking parallels in fact, with sacrifices all over the place! Like the Jerome, the Stafford has been "refuted" by careful analysis and high level play. But as some have noted, we don't play engines, we play people! The shock value of both gambits can be imposing for those not prepared...

As for the Stafford Gambit, I find it absolutely fascinating because there are so many really deep and tricky traps in for white. I was actually attracted to the Stafford because of my interest in the Jerome - they both appeal to my sense of danger and adventure, and both pack the same psychological punch against an opponent who is prepared for other lines. In the case of the Stafford, you will discover that natural looking moves for white are the most fraught with danger, and white’s move order is critical to his success or failure. I would also say that, from my considerable research, the Stafford seems to be far more playable, and I was not exaggerating when I said that GMs, IMs, and club players alike have been employing it since about August 2020, even though its pedigree goes back much further in time...

The reason for its wild popularity of late can be found in a bombshell YouTube video by IM Eric Rosen in August 2020. IM Jonathan Schrantz has also helped to popularize some very crucial theoretical lines – he posted a YouTube video in which he demonstrates how he defeated Stockfish 12 with his ‘Magic Line’. Both Eric and Jonathan (who goes by the handle zolpi on Lichess) are members of the same St Louis Chess Club and both are knowledgeable and articulate streamers. Eric has almost a dozen excellent videos online about the Stafford, and his initial one has been demonstrated to have quadrupled the amount of interest in Stafford chess. Several GMs, including Daniel Naroditsky, have videos claiming to have ‘refuted’ the Stafford, but it lives on and the refutations have themselves been refuted!

Certainly those who play the Jerome can find room in their opening repertoire for the Stafford. In fact, many have already have.

Why not give it a try? Be careful, though, as it's highly addictive.

 

Jerome Gambit: If You Stop and Think About It

If you stop and think about it, the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+) is a pretty weak opening.

But - what if you didn't have time to stop and think about it?

Or, even better, what if your opponent didn't have time?

Well, then, you might find yourself playing the Jerome in a bullet game, 1 minute / no increment time control.

And, if you were "Cliff Hardy", playing online, you might find yourself defeating an IM.

Just saying.

[Notes by Cliff; diagrams and occasional comments by me - Rick] 

This was a bullet game (1 minute each, no increment) I played against IM Nichita Morozov from Moldova on Lichess. He held a strong position for quite a while but my Jerome pawns maintained great potential and eventually Nichita's desire to eliminate them proved to be a little too strong to resist, leading to his downfall.

Cliff Hardy (2205) - IM Nichita Morozov (2456), Lichess, 2019

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ 

4...Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6?! -+

The same inferior defence that IM Rosen played against me long ago - 6...Kf8 -++ or 6...Ke6!? -++ were better choices.

7.Qd5+ 

I had a recent ten minute each game on Lichess where my opponent, rated in the 1700's, resigned at this point as black, for whatever reason!

7...Kf8 8.Qxc5+ Qe7 

 It helps that Cliff has already seen this position, in Hardy - Sevostianov, 1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2018 (0-1, 56) and Hardy - NN, 1 0 bullet, lichess.org, 2018 (1-0, 20 ) - Rick

9.Qe3 Nf6 10.Nc3 d5!

This liberating move is Stockfish's top choice (though only after it has a long think!) I'm not sure what the stats are on how often this excellent sacrifice is found by players in this position, but I would imagine the overwhelming majority would play the much simpler 10...d6 here.

(The Database has 12 games with the position after White's 10th move; 3 of them, including this one, continue with 10...d5. Three games continue with 10...d6; five continue with 10...c6; one continues with 10...Kf7. - Rick)

11.exd5 Qxe3+?

Here Stockfish likes the deep 11...Kf7!, with the idea of eventually getting the pawn back on d5 e.g. 12.0-0 Rd8 13.Qf3 (or 13.Qd4 c6) 13...Qe5 -+, when White's doomed d5-pawn is surrounded.

12.dxe3?

After 12.fxe3! Bf5 13.d3 +=, White could then have defended his pawn on d5 with the push e3-e4, if found to be necessary.

12...Bf5 

13.Bd2

White couldn't have defended his c-pawn as 13.Kd1? Rd8 would have been too dangerous.

13...Rd8 14.f3 Bxc2 15.Rc1 Bd3 16.e4 Kf7

17.Bg5? -+

17.Na4 =+, threatening Rxc7 or Nc5, would have reduced black's advantage to a minimum.

17...Rhe8 18.Kf2 c6 19.dxc6 bxc6 20.Rhe1 Rd7?!

20...Ne5 -+ would have been better.

21.g4? 

21.Na4, threatening Nc5 again, would have equalised.

21...Rb8? 

21...h6 -++

22.b3?

22.e5!, threatening exf6 or the fork e6+, would have led to a slight advantage for White. Over the next few moves, both players kept missing that this e-pawn push was advantageous for White.

22...c5? 23.h4? 

23.e5! +-

23...c4? 24. bxc4? 

24.e5! =

24...Rb2+?

Simply recapturing with 24...Bxc4 would have been good, since if 24...Bxc4 25.e5 =+, Black's bishop would have prevented White from safely playing the fork e5-e6+.

25.Kg3 Ne5 26.Bxf6? -+

Retaining the bishop with 26.Bf4 += would have been much better, when the passed e-pawn would have created good chances for White.

26...gxf6 27.f4 Nxc4 28.Nd5 Rxa2 29.g5 Ra3 30.Kg4 

30...fxg5? -++

Fine, but 30...f5! would have been a nice sacrifice, when 30.Kh5 (30. Kxf5? Rxd5! -++) 30...fxe4 -++ would have been overwhelming for Black.

31.hxg5 Bxe4??

Black's patience for restraining the potential energy of White's passed Jerome e-pawn ran out and so he eliminated it, but attacking it instead with 31...Nd6 or 31...Nd2, would have retained Black's winning advantage.

32.Rxe4 ++-

Presumably, when Black played 31...Bxe4??, he missed the fact that 32...Rxd5 would be met by a rook capturing on c4. Despite the fact that material was now equal, White's greater central presence and passed Jerome f-pawn surprisingly yielded a winning advantage.

32...Nd6 33.Re5 Rb7 34.Rc6 Ne8 35.Rce6 Ng7 36.Rf6+ Kg8 37.Ne7+

White's advantage now becomes obvious, since 37...Kh8 would have allowed 38.Rf8 checkmate.

37...Rxe7 38.Rxe7 h5+ 39.Kh4?!

39.gxh6 would have been even better.

39...Ra4 40.Rd7 Rb4 41.g6?!

41.Rd8+ Kh7 42.Rh6 mate would have finished off the win neatly.

41...Rb8 42.Rff7 Rf8??

Blundering into a mate, though Black was clearly lost anyway.

43.Rxg7+ Kh8 44.Rh7+

and Black lost on time, before 44...Kg8 45.Rdg7 mate were to happen.

Bye.

Cliff Hardy

P.S. Too bad there are no known examples of world champions playing the Jerome Gambit, as far as I know. I do have copies of games in my records where Magnus Carlsen has beaten high rated opponents on Lichess with the Fred Opening (1.e4 f5) and the Tranvestite Opening (1..c6, 2...Qa5, 3...f6, 4...Qh5, 5...Kd8 and 6...Qe8) so there is some hope that one day he will play the Jerome Gambit against high class opposition.