Gordon Botley vs John Nicholas Briggs
Thanet Open, 2014 · Result ½–½ · Modern Defense: Averbakh Variation, Pseudo-Sämisch (A42).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Gordon Botley vs John Nicholas Briggs 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
- Gordon Botley (2150)
- Black
- John Nicholas Briggs (1955)
- Result
- ½–½
- Event
- Thanet Open
- Year
- 2014
- Opening
- Modern Defense: Averbakh Variation, Pseudo-Sämisch (A42)
About this chess game
This chess game between Gordon Botley (2150) and John Nicholas Briggs (1955) was played at Thanet Open in 2014 and finished ½–½. The opening was the Modern Defense: Averbakh Variation, Pseudo-Sämisch (A42). 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 Gordon Botley games or John Nicholas Briggs games? This Gordon Botley vs John Nicholas Briggs 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 Modern Defense: Averbakh Variation, Pseudo-Sämisch.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Gordon Botley vs John Nicholas Briggs?
Gordon Botley vs John Nicholas Briggs (2014) finished ½–½, and the game was drawn.
What opening was played in Gordon Botley vs John Nicholas Briggs?
The game opened with the Modern Defense: Averbakh Variation, Pseudo-Sämisch (ECO A42).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Gordon Botley vs John Nicholas Briggs, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.