Kennan Kesterson vs James J. McDonnell
2017 · Result ½–½ · Sicilian Defense: Scheveningen Variation, Modern Variation (B83).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Kennan Kesterson vs James J. McDonnell 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
- Kennan Kesterson (1510)
- Black
- James J. McDonnell (1834)
- Result
- ½–½
- Year
- 2017
- Opening
- Sicilian Defense: Scheveningen Variation, Modern Variation (B83)
About this chess game
This chess game between Kennan Kesterson (1510) and James J. McDonnell (1834) was played in 2017 and finished ½–½. The opening was the Sicilian Defense: Scheveningen Variation, Modern Variation (B83). 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 Kennan Kesterson games or James J. McDonnell games? This Kennan Kesterson vs James J. McDonnell 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 Sicilian Defense: Scheveningen Variation, Modern Variation.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Kennan Kesterson vs James J. McDonnell?
Kennan Kesterson vs James J. McDonnell (2017) finished ½–½, and the game was drawn.
What opening was played in Kennan Kesterson vs James J. McDonnell?
The game opened with the Sicilian Defense: Scheveningen Variation, Modern Variation (ECO B83).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Kennan Kesterson vs James J. McDonnell, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.