Matthew Davies vs David Tomboline
4NCL Division 4 South, 2019 · Result ½–½ · Dutch Defense: Stonewall Variation, Modern Variation (A90).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Matthew Davies vs David Tomboline 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
- Matthew Davies (1932)
- Black
- David Tomboline (1946)
- Result
- ½–½
- Event
- 4NCL Division 4 South
- Year
- 2019
- Opening
- Dutch Defense: Stonewall Variation, Modern Variation (A90)
About this chess game
This chess game between Matthew Davies (1932) and David Tomboline (1946) was played at 4NCL Division 4 South in 2019 and finished ½–½. The opening was the Dutch Defense: Stonewall Variation, Modern Variation (A90). 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 Matthew Davies games or David Tomboline games? This Matthew Davies vs David Tomboline 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 Dutch Defense: Stonewall Variation, Modern Variation.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Matthew Davies vs David Tomboline?
Matthew Davies vs David Tomboline (2019) finished ½–½, and the game was drawn.
What opening was played in Matthew Davies vs David Tomboline?
The game opened with the Dutch Defense: Stonewall Variation, Modern Variation (ECO A90).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Matthew Davies vs David Tomboline, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.