Francisco Celio Feijo vs Francisco Regis Pontes
2000 · Result 0–1 · Queen's Pawn Game: Zukertort Variation (D05).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Francisco Celio Feijo vs Francisco Regis Pontes 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
- Francisco Celio Feijo (1825)
- Black
- Francisco Regis Pontes (1800)
- Result
- 0–1
- Year
- 2000
- Opening
- Queen's Pawn Game: Zukertort Variation (D05)
About this chess game
This chess game between Francisco Celio Feijo (1825) and Francisco Regis Pontes (1800) was played in 2000 and finished 0–1. The opening was the Queen's Pawn Game: Zukertort Variation (D05). 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 Francisco Celio Feijo games or Francisco Regis Pontes games? This Francisco Celio Feijo vs Francisco Regis Pontes 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 Queen's Pawn Game: Zukertort Variation.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Francisco Celio Feijo vs Francisco Regis Pontes?
Francisco Celio Feijo vs Francisco Regis Pontes (2000) finished 0–1, a win for Francisco Regis Pontes.
What opening was played in Francisco Celio Feijo vs Francisco Regis Pontes?
The game opened with the Queen's Pawn Game: Zukertort Variation (ECO D05).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Francisco Celio Feijo vs Francisco Regis Pontes, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.