Paula Biziewska vs Kamila Jaskiewicz
2010 · Result 0–1 · Sicilian Defense: Scheveningen Variation, Classical Variation (B84).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Paula Biziewska vs Kamila Jaskiewicz with deep analysis, save the moments that matter, fold the ideas into your own opening repertoire, and drill the positions until they're second nature. CipherChess turns the games you study into the results you get — free to start.
Start Free on CipherChessMore Games By These Players
Game details
- White
- Paula Biziewska (1497)
- Black
- Kamila Jaskiewicz (1611)
- Result
- 0–1
- Year
- 2010
- Opening
- Sicilian Defense: Scheveningen Variation, Classical Variation (B84)
About this chess game
This chess game between Paula Biziewska (1497) and Kamila Jaskiewicz (1611) was played in 2010 and finished 0–1. The opening was the Sicilian Defense: Scheveningen Variation, Classical Variation (B84). You can replay the full game move by move on the interactive board above, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to study every move with the Stockfish engine.
Looking for more Paula Biziewska games or Kamila Jaskiewicz games? This Paula Biziewska vs Kamila Jaskiewicz encounter is one of millions of chess games indexed in the CipherChess mega database. Browse both players' full records, the openings they play most, and head-to-head results, then load any game onto the board to prepare your own lines against the Sicilian Defense: Scheveningen Variation, Classical Variation.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Paula Biziewska vs Kamila Jaskiewicz?
Paula Biziewska vs Kamila Jaskiewicz (2010) finished 0–1, a win for Kamila Jaskiewicz.
What opening was played in Paula Biziewska vs Kamila Jaskiewicz?
The game opened with the Sicilian Defense: Scheveningen Variation, Classical Variation (ECO B84).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Paula Biziewska vs Kamila Jaskiewicz, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.