Edson Ricardo Bocca vs Luiz Americo De Paiva Filho
2016 · Result ½–½ · Sicilian Defense: French Variation (B40).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Edson Ricardo Bocca vs Luiz Americo De Paiva Filho 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
- Edson Ricardo Bocca (1640)
- Black
- Luiz Americo De Paiva Filho (1971)
- Result
- ½–½
- Year
- 2016
- Opening
- Sicilian Defense: French Variation (B40)
About this chess game
This chess game between Edson Ricardo Bocca (1640) and Luiz Americo De Paiva Filho (1971) was played in 2016 and finished ½–½. The opening was the Sicilian Defense: French Variation (B40). 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 Edson Ricardo Bocca games or Luiz Americo De Paiva Filho games? This Edson Ricardo Bocca vs Luiz Americo De Paiva Filho 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: French Variation.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Edson Ricardo Bocca vs Luiz Americo De Paiva Filho?
Edson Ricardo Bocca vs Luiz Americo De Paiva Filho (2016) finished ½–½, and the game was drawn.
What opening was played in Edson Ricardo Bocca vs Luiz Americo De Paiva Filho?
The game opened with the Sicilian Defense: French Variation (ECO B40).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Edson Ricardo Bocca vs Luiz Americo De Paiva Filho, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.