Peter Jugl vs Maximilian Nitz
EU/C2018/pr. 13, 2018 · Result 1–0 · Queen's Gambit Declined: Exchange Variation, Reshevsky Variation (D36).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Peter Jugl vs Maximilian Nitz 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
- Peter Jugl (2296)
- Black
- Maximilian Nitz (1728)
- Result
- 1–0
- Event
- EU/C2018/pr. 13
- Year
- 2018
- Opening
- Queen's Gambit Declined: Exchange Variation, Reshevsky Variation (D36)
About this chess game
This chess game between Peter Jugl (2296) and Maximilian Nitz (1728) was played at EU/C2018/pr. 13 in 2018 and finished 1–0. The opening was the Queen's Gambit Declined: Exchange Variation, Reshevsky Variation (D36). 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 Peter Jugl games or Maximilian Nitz games? This Peter Jugl vs Maximilian Nitz 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 Gambit Declined: Exchange Variation, Reshevsky Variation.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Peter Jugl vs Maximilian Nitz?
Peter Jugl vs Maximilian Nitz (2018) finished 1–0, a win for Peter Jugl.
What opening was played in Peter Jugl vs Maximilian Nitz?
The game opened with the Queen's Gambit Declined: Exchange Variation, Reshevsky Variation (ECO D36).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Peter Jugl vs Maximilian Nitz, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.