Colin Denham-Kennedy vs Trevor S Brotherton
XV AEAC/P08 (ESP), 2016 · Result 0–1 · Pirc Defense: Classical Variation (B08).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Colin Denham-Kennedy vs Trevor S Brotherton 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
- Colin Denham-Kennedy (1653)
- Black
- Trevor S Brotherton (1950)
- Result
- 0–1
- Event
- XV AEAC/P08 (ESP)
- Year
- 2016
- Opening
- Pirc Defense: Classical Variation (B08)
About this chess game
This chess game between Colin Denham-Kennedy (1653) and Trevor S Brotherton (1950) was played at XV AEAC/P08 (ESP) in 2016 and finished 0–1. The opening was the Pirc Defense: Classical Variation (B08). 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 Colin Denham-Kennedy games or Trevor S Brotherton games? This Colin Denham-Kennedy vs Trevor S Brotherton 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 Pirc Defense: Classical Variation.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Colin Denham-Kennedy vs Trevor S Brotherton?
Colin Denham-Kennedy vs Trevor S Brotherton (2016) finished 0–1, a win for Trevor S Brotherton.
What opening was played in Colin Denham-Kennedy vs Trevor S Brotherton?
The game opened with the Pirc Defense: Classical Variation (ECO B08).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Colin Denham-Kennedy vs Trevor S Brotherton, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.