Ralf Kellerwessel vs Jan Erik Goetz
2013 · Result 1–0 · English Opening: Anglo-Indian Defense, Queen's Knight Variation (A16).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Ralf Kellerwessel vs Jan Erik Goetz 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
- Ralf Kellerwessel (1919)
- Black
- Jan Erik Goetz (1677)
- Result
- 1–0
- Year
- 2013
- Opening
- English Opening: Anglo-Indian Defense, Queen's Knight Variation (A16)
About this chess game
This chess game between Ralf Kellerwessel (1919) and Jan Erik Goetz (1677) was played in 2013 and finished 1–0. The opening was the English Opening: Anglo-Indian Defense, Queen's Knight Variation (A16). 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 Ralf Kellerwessel games or Jan Erik Goetz games? This Ralf Kellerwessel vs Jan Erik Goetz 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 English Opening: Anglo-Indian Defense, Queen's Knight Variation.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Ralf Kellerwessel vs Jan Erik Goetz?
Ralf Kellerwessel vs Jan Erik Goetz (2013) finished 1–0, a win for Ralf Kellerwessel.
What opening was played in Ralf Kellerwessel vs Jan Erik Goetz?
The game opened with the English Opening: Anglo-Indian Defense, Queen's Knight Variation (ECO A16).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Ralf Kellerwessel vs Jan Erik Goetz, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.