game review is trying to invalidate the jerome gambit?

Sort:
poo-lover

thiswebsitesucks1312
yes
ThrillerFan

Jerome Gambit is trash! Face the facts!

poo-lover
 
Explain this
UltraDarkMatter
It was -4 until your opponent blundered mate. Any king move other than Kc4 was completely winning for them
AhmedAryan
poo-lover wrote:
 
Explain this

ok

jmoopening
Just checkmated my opponent using this trash opening.

 ThrillerFan wrote:

Jerome Gambit is trash! Face the facts!

The_Blue_J
poo-lover wrote:
 

Game review always puts moves in comparison with completely accurate play...

With completely accurate play, all that happens is that you lose your bishop...

This is a gambit that relies on the opponent's mistakes, with accurate play though, this can be refuted...

magipi
The_Blue_J wrote:
poo-lover wrote:
 

Game review always puts moves in comparison with completely accurate play...

The Game review is as far from "completely accurate play" as you can get. The analysis it uses is extremely shallow and bad. Plus the conclusions and advice are usually complete nonsense.

Also, the reason chess.com no longer recognizes the Jerome gambit is because some guy decided that it won't. No engine had any part in that.

ThrillerFan
jmoopening wrote:
Just checkmated my opponent using this trash opening.

 ThrillerFan wrote:

Jerome Gambit is trash! Face the facts!

Just because you can checkmate one clown who doesn't understand defense worth a lick and it was probably a blitz game as well proves nothing about the validity of that trash opening.

I'm sure if you look hard enough, you can find a game that White won after 1.d4 e6 2.Bg5?? Qxg5. Does that suddenly validate 2.Bg5?? UHM....NO!!!!!