Fernando De Andres Gonalons vs Peter Larem
2013 · Result 1–0 · Benko Gambit Accepted: Fully Accepted Variation (A58).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Fernando De Andres Gonalons vs Peter Larem 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
- Fernando De Andres Gonalons (2087)
- Black
- Peter Larem (1939)
- Result
- 1–0
- Year
- 2013
- Opening
- Benko Gambit Accepted: Fully Accepted Variation (A58)
About this chess game
This chess game between Fernando De Andres Gonalons (2087) and Peter Larem (1939) was played in 2013 and finished 1–0. The opening was the Benko Gambit Accepted: Fully Accepted Variation (A58). 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 Fernando De Andres Gonalons games or Peter Larem games? This Fernando De Andres Gonalons vs Peter Larem 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 Benko Gambit Accepted: Fully Accepted Variation.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Fernando De Andres Gonalons vs Peter Larem?
Fernando De Andres Gonalons vs Peter Larem (2013) finished 1–0, a win for Fernando De Andres Gonalons.
What opening was played in Fernando De Andres Gonalons vs Peter Larem?
The game opened with the Benko Gambit Accepted: Fully Accepted Variation (ECO A58).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Fernando De Andres Gonalons vs Peter Larem, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.