Didier Fournel vs Michel Schmouchkovitch
2012 · Result 0–1 · Dutch Defense: Stonewall Variation, Modern Variation (A90).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Didier Fournel vs Michel Schmouchkovitch 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
- Didier Fournel (1664)
- Black
- Michel Schmouchkovitch (1947)
- Result
- 0–1
- Year
- 2012
- Opening
- Dutch Defense: Stonewall Variation, Modern Variation (A90)
About this chess game
This chess game between Didier Fournel (1664) and Michel Schmouchkovitch (1947) was played in 2012 and finished 0–1. 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 Didier Fournel games or Michel Schmouchkovitch games? This Didier Fournel vs Michel Schmouchkovitch 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 Didier Fournel vs Michel Schmouchkovitch?
Didier Fournel vs Michel Schmouchkovitch (2012) finished 0–1, a win for Michel Schmouchkovitch.
What opening was played in Didier Fournel vs Michel Schmouchkovitch?
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 Didier Fournel vs Michel Schmouchkovitch, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.