Jerome Gambit samples

For the past few months, I have been experimenting with the Jerome Gambit.  The opening moves are 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ which is probably a dubious or blunder type of move.  But it's the type of opening I like in blitz chess and I have had fun and success with it.  My success this year has been 18 wins, 1 draw, and 1 loss.  I got motivated with the opening after reading Rick Kennedy's blog site called JeromeGambit (http://jeromegambit.blogspot.com/) and after receiving a database of thousands of Jerome Gambit games that Kennedy has collected over the years.  So I started experimenting with it in 15 minute games here at chess.com and other sites.

Here are a few samples of my games with the Jerome Gambit, named after Alonzo Wheeler Jerome, who experimented with it in the 19th century.

From Rick Kennedy, which I agree:
WARNING: The Jerome Gambit is quite disreputable and has quite a few refutations. Its use should be restricted to "fun" games or as a manner of offering "odds" to weaker opponents. The author is not responsible for any disasters that might come from using the Jerome Gambit (although he remains interested in learning about and staring at the wreckage).

Of course if black blunders badly, white may have a chance. But if he doesn't, then black will just have a big advantage. For example, if Richard123 played 6... Rf8 instead of 6... Ng4?? he would just be up a piece for a pawn. Or like you said, if David played 12... Qxd1 13. Raxd1 Ng6 he would be ok.

If you like such gambits, I think the Halloween Gambit is much more serious and more "sound" than this. You probably know the site, but if you don't,  http://www.jakob.at/steffen/halloween/index.html contains alot of analysis on that gambit.

i've been seeing this sequence more lately... I especially like how it gets the King moving and vulnerable right away.  Thanks for the tip Bill.. I'll try the Jerome Gambit and see if it works for me...

I'd say that if you're going to gambit in the Giuoco Piano, then the Evans is the soundest. But if you want a gambit that's more likely to catch your opponent off guard, because he doesn't know it, then the Italian Gambit (4. d4) is probably sounder than 4. Bxf7+.

Nice games...  I think it is an opening for bullet and blitz games. Very fast attacking and white has a great opportunity to win in several moves.

If you play any Jerome Gambirts, send them to Rick Kennedy (richardfkennedy@hotmail.com) as he collects them all. 

I have played the Elephant Gambit 5 times, with 5 wins since 2001.  Here is one of my games with it.

Isn't that the Halloween rather than the Elephant Gambit? (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5)

Sorry to say that, but black played terribly in all those games. The Jerome gambit can be easily refuted.

 You are right, Kacparov, the Jerome Gambit has any number of refutations -- something I'm very clear about on my Jerome Gambit Blog (jeromegambit.blogspot.com), where I have posted most, if not all, of them. Tomorrow's post (2/20/10), for example, will investigate a relatively new, hypermodern defense, to the Gambit.

Why play the Jerome Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+)?

It's fun, especially for those who don't take their chess too seriously.

It leads to rough-and-tumble games where fortune can favor the bold.

It has an interesting history, for those who like to go there.

Among other things, the Jerome Gambit has inspired a sharp response to the sometimes-annoying (on different levels) Blackburne Shilling Gambit: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4?! 4.Bxf7+!? It has encouraged dynamic play against the timid Semi-Italian Opening: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6!? 4.0-0 Bc5 5.Bxf7+!?

One final reason that the Jerome Gambit is of interest to me, from my recent "Two Wrongs Making A Right" post:

A while back, I tried to explain the Jerome Gambit and this blog to a friend of mine – a fellow clinican who does not play chess. She could not understand why I was so fascinated by a line that was clearly wrong.

I wasn't able to get across the idea that part of me appreciated the myriad wrong reactions to the Jerome by Black that helped make the opening right. 

Kacparov, you are FIDE rated 2198.  Of course Black played terribly in all those games, relative to you.  In fact, all games lost under 20 moves were probably played terribly.  Almost everyone under 2000 plays terribly, Black or White.  Of course the Jerome Gambit can be easily refuted, just like the Rice Gambit was and hundreds of other variations and Gambits (is the King's Gambit or the Evans Gambit or the Blackmar Diemer Gambit or the Smith Morra gambits easily refuted in your opinion?).  But you have to play darn carefully to refute it, and under tremendous time pressure.  And if you have never seen it (hardly analyzed or in opening books), you have to discover how to refute it.  Could you have refuted it when you were just learnng chess or lower rated?   Can you beat a grandmaster every time if you were Black against the Jerome Gambit and playing bullet or blitz chess?  I bet you would win 90% of the time or more if you played White with the Jerome Gambit and had an opponent rated less than you.  I don't play this in regular tournaments or against masters.  I play it for fun and maybe the loss to my opponent will help him understand how to play it better next time.  I don't care if I win or lose.  I play chess and wierd chess openings for entertainment and like to create my own variations.  And it's just the random pick of who my opponent is when I play these openings and try new ideas.  I agree with perrypawnpusher and I did put a warning statement in my article about playing it.  I'll continue to play it against weaker oppponents and have fun.

I've played it only a few times against lower-rated opponents and I won all games. But it doesn't mean you will always win against low-rated people. Some knowledge will make it very difficult to win.

The gambits you named can't be easily refuted, maybe you can gain a small advantage but no more.

This is a game I won, but my opponent got a completely won position after the opening. His rating was about 1700-1800 chess.com (not sure if recounted it well).

nice game!

agreed.

 Quite true, although it's still possible to "ruin" an Evans by turning it into an "Evans Jerome Gambit" like Charlick (of 1.d4 e5 fame) did at least once...

This is one of the most enjoyable posts that I've seen on here. Not sure I would want to try it though. I lose enough games already lol.

Pawnpusher, did I miss something on your last post here? There isn't any schedule of moves and I would be very interested in seeing it.

Gambits are good for teaching or learning, more quickly, piece coordination and how to maintain the initiative.  Ken Smith used to say gambits separate the men from the boys.

Moreover it can be mind changing to play just for the fun of it! 

A few more examples or variations to the Jerome.