Olivier Carteron vs Georges Aumont-Mathieu
2009 · Result 0–1 · Italian Game: Two Knights Defense, Knight Attack (C57).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Olivier Carteron vs Georges Aumont-Mathieu 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
- Olivier Carteron (1259)
- Black
- Georges Aumont-Mathieu (1645)
- Result
- 0–1
- Year
- 2009
- Opening
- Italian Game: Two Knights Defense, Knight Attack (C57)
About this chess game
This chess game between Olivier Carteron (1259) and Georges Aumont-Mathieu (1645) was played in 2009 and finished 0–1. The opening was the Italian Game: Two Knights Defense, Knight Attack (C57). 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 Olivier Carteron games or Georges Aumont-Mathieu games? This Olivier Carteron vs Georges Aumont-Mathieu 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 Italian Game: Two Knights Defense, Knight Attack.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Olivier Carteron vs Georges Aumont-Mathieu?
Olivier Carteron vs Georges Aumont-Mathieu (2009) finished 0–1, a win for Georges Aumont-Mathieu.
What opening was played in Olivier Carteron vs Georges Aumont-Mathieu?
The game opened with the Italian Game: Two Knights Defense, Knight Attack (ECO C57).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Olivier Carteron vs Georges Aumont-Mathieu, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.