Helmut Haselhorst vs Ulrich Woestmann
2010 · Result 1–0 · Grünfeld Defense: Three Knights Variation, Petrosian System (D91).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Helmut Haselhorst vs Ulrich Woestmann 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
- Helmut Haselhorst (2148)
- Black
- Ulrich Woestmann (2060)
- Result
- 1–0
- Year
- 2010
- Opening
- Grünfeld Defense: Three Knights Variation, Petrosian System (D91)
About this chess game
This chess game between Helmut Haselhorst (2148) and Ulrich Woestmann (2060) was played in 2010 and finished 1–0. The opening was the Grünfeld Defense: Three Knights Variation, Petrosian System (D91). 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 Helmut Haselhorst games or Ulrich Woestmann games? This Helmut Haselhorst vs Ulrich Woestmann 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 Grünfeld Defense: Three Knights Variation, Petrosian System.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Helmut Haselhorst vs Ulrich Woestmann?
Helmut Haselhorst vs Ulrich Woestmann (2010) finished 1–0, a win for Helmut Haselhorst.
What opening was played in Helmut Haselhorst vs Ulrich Woestmann?
The game opened with the Grünfeld Defense: Three Knights Variation, Petrosian System (ECO D91).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Helmut Haselhorst vs Ulrich Woestmann, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.