In Memoriam Bob Bornholz There are many ways of memorializing a person who has passed away. At the Club's recent annual membership meeting, there was a moment of silence in honor of the late Bob Bornholz, who was one of Pittsburgh's strongest players for many years. "It's ironic that they had a moment of silence", said one of our veterans, "because while he was at the club, there was never a moment of silence!" I had three exciting games with Bob Bornholz in the 1970's. One of them was unfortunately not publishable because it was decided by a gross blunder. But the two other games, one win for him and one for me, show off his creativity and good chess sense. I am glad for this opportunity to publish a little of Bob Bornholz's real contribution to Pittsburgh chess. Pittsburgh Chess League February 15, 1975 White: Bruce Leverett, CMU Black: Bob Bornholz, Pittsburgh Chess Club 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 g6 3 Nc3 Bg7 4 Nf3 O-O 5 g3 d6 6 Bg2 c6 7 O-O Qc7 This is novel. More conventional ways of enforcing ... e5 are 8 ... Nbd7 and 8 ... Qa5. 8 Qc2 e5 9 Rd1 Na6 10 h3 Be6 Black sees that 11 d5 just loses the pawn! 11 b3 Rfe8 12 dxe5? This is pointless. White trades his d4-pawn for Black's d6-pawn. Which do you think is better? White should preserve his space advantage with 12 e4. 12 ... dxe5 13 Be3 Bf5 14 Qd2 Rad8 15 Qe1 Nb4 16 Rxd8 Rxd8 17 Rd1 Re8 18 Qd2 Nc2 19 Nh4 What was I thinking of? 19 Bh6 looks natural. 19 ... Nxe3 20 Qxe3 Bc8 21 Nf3 White declines 21 Qxa7 because of 21 ... e4 (threatening 22 ... g5) 22 Qe3 h6! 21 ... Nd7 22 Ne4 And now 22 Qxa7 e4 23 Nd4 e3! gives Black plenty for the pawn. As strange as 22 Ne4 seems, it is the only constructive thing left to do in the position. 22 ... f5 22 ... Bf8? 23 Rxd7! 23 Nd6 Re6 24 Nxc8 Qxc8 25 Qxa7 This too is necessary. White cannot avoid a severe disadvantage in space and he might as well get something for it. 25 ... e4 26 Ng5 Re8 27 h4 Black threatened 27 ... h6. 27 ... Ne5 28 Qc5 Bf8 29 Qd4 Bg7 30 Qd2 Would Black have taken the draw by 30 Qc5 Bf8? It's anybody's guess. 30 ... h6 31 Nh3 Kh7 32 Nf4 Bf8 33 Qc1 Qa8 34 Rd6? The last thing White should do is to start a little adventure that leaves his rook trapped behind enemy lines. 34 ... Bg7 35 Qd2? Bf8! 36 Re6 Rd8 37 Qb2 Qa5 Black owns the whole board. The immediate threat is 38 ... Qe1+ (but not 38 ... Rd2? 39 Rxe5). White's next move fails to prevent this, but there wasn't anything to save the game any more. 38 Nd5 Qe1+ 39 Bf1 Ng4 40 e3 cxd5 41 Rb6 Rd7 42 cxd5 Bc5 43 Rb5 Nxe3 44 fxe3 Qxe3+ 45 Kh2 Qg1+ Resigns This game also appeared in the May 1978 issue of En Passant, with notes by me. Pittsburgh Chess League April 30, 1978 White: Bob Bornholz, Pittsburgh Chess Club Black: Bruce Leverett, CMU 1 c4 e6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Nf3 d5 4 Nc3 Be7 5 Bg5 O-O 6 e3 h6 7 Bh4 b6 This is the Tartakower variation. It's a little more promising than the lines with 6 ... Nbd7, which were already ancient when I learned them as a beginner. I won some nice games with the Tartakower in the 1970's, including one against Icelandic IM (now GM) Helgi Olafsson. I wonder why I gave it up. 8 cxd5 The other winning tries are variations where White gives up the two bishops, such as 8 Qb3 (or 8 Rc1 or even 8 Be2 as I recently tried against Andy Rea) Bb7 9 Bxf6 Bxf6 10 cxd5 exd5, etc. White can play in a more relaxed style with moves like 8 Rc1 Bb7 9 Bd3; the game becomes about even. 8 ... Nxd5 9 Bxe7 Qxe7 10 Nxd5 exd5 11 Qb3 At the time of this game the most important variation I knew was from Timman-Geller, Hilversum 1973: 11 Rc1 Be6 12 Qa4 c5 13 Qa3 Rc8 14 Bb5!? (introduced by Fischer in his 1972 match with Spassky) 14 ... Qb7! An elegant pawn sacrifice. 15 dxc5 bxc5 16 Rxc5 Rxc5 17 Qxc5 Na6 18 Bxa6 Qxa6 gave Black good compensation. 11 ... Be6 12 Rc1 Rc8 13 Be2 White's Bb5 doesn't make any sense here, since Black hasn't yet moved his c-pawn (he could simply answer 13 ... c6). How did that happen? White's 11 Qb3 blocked his b-pawn, so he couldn't threaten to move it to b4, so Black could take his time about playing ... c5. An interesting subtlety. But my opponent probably wasn't interested in the early Bb5 lines anyway. 13 ... c5 14 dxc5 bxc5 15 Qa3 Nd7 In a similar position (without the exchange of pawns on c5), BCO suggests that Black unpin the c-pawn by 15 ... a5 16 O-O Qa7!? as in Karpov-Kavalek, Linares 1981. 16 O-O 16 Nd4? Qg5! 16 ... Qf6!?? Black would normally unpin the c-pawn while keeping an eye on it with something like 16 ... Qf8. The text move tries to cut the Gordian knot, abandoning the c-pawn for White's b-pawn. But I think that 17 b3 would have exposed the fallacy of this idea. 17 Bb5 Ne5 Black must play this, though it is rather drawish. After 17 ... Nb6 18 Rxc5 Rxc5 19 Qxc5 Qxb2 20 a4 Rc8 21 Qd6, the threat of 22 Nd4 is powerful. Likewise 17 ... c4 18 Bxd7! Bxd7 19 Nd4 would be just what White wants. But now, White has nothing better than 18 Nxe5 Qxe5, and either 19 Rxc5 Rxc5 20 Qxc5 Qxb2 21 a4 a5, or 19 b3 c4, leaves Black with little to fear. 18 Nd2? c4! Trying too hard to win, White may already be losing. A sample of what could be in store is 19 b3? a6! 20 Ba4 c3 21 Nb1 c2 22 Nd2 Nd3. Instead, 19 e4 looks logical, but 19 ... Rab8 20 Ba6 (20 Ba4 Nd3) Rc6 threatens 20 ... Rbb6. 19 f4?!? Nd3 20 Rc2 Rab8 21 Ba6 Nb4 Probably 21 ... Rc6, threatening both 22 ... Nb4 and 21 ... Rbb6, was more convincing. 22 Bxc8 Nxc2 23 Qa4 Nxe3 24 Qxa7 Rxc8 25 Qxe3 Bf5! I didn't care to find out if White could get adequate counterplay after 25 ... Qxb2 26 f5. 26 b3 If 26 Qa3 Qd4+. The best chance may have been 26 Qc3. Then, exchanging queens may win but seems unnecessarily difficult: 26 ... Qxc3 27 bxc3 Ra8 28 Ra1 Ra3 29 Nb1 Bxb1 30 Rxb1 Rxa2 31 Rd1, etc. Instead, after 26 ... Qb6+ 27 Kh1 d4 28 Qa3 c3 29 bxc3 dxc3 30 Nb3 c2, Black's control of the whole board should assure the win. 26 ... d4 27 Qf3 c3 28 Nc4 d3 29 g4 Qd4+ 30 Qe3 Rxc4 31 Qxd4 Rxd4 Resigns