Sergei Khamitskiy vs Kacper Tomaszewski
2012 · Result 1–0 · Dutch Defense: Leningrad Variation, Matulovic Variation (A89).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Sergei Khamitskiy vs Kacper Tomaszewski 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
- Sergei Khamitskiy (2282)
- Black
- Kacper Tomaszewski (1939)
- Result
- 1–0
- Year
- 2012
- Opening
- Dutch Defense: Leningrad Variation, Matulovic Variation (A89)
About this chess game
This chess game between Sergei Khamitskiy (2282) and Kacper Tomaszewski (1939) was played in 2012 and finished 1–0. The opening was the Dutch Defense: Leningrad Variation, Matulovic Variation (A89). 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 Sergei Khamitskiy games or Kacper Tomaszewski games? This Sergei Khamitskiy vs Kacper Tomaszewski 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: Leningrad Variation, Matulovic Variation.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Sergei Khamitskiy vs Kacper Tomaszewski?
Sergei Khamitskiy vs Kacper Tomaszewski (2012) finished 1–0, a win for Sergei Khamitskiy.
What opening was played in Sergei Khamitskiy vs Kacper Tomaszewski?
The game opened with the Dutch Defense: Leningrad Variation, Matulovic Variation (ECO A89).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Sergei Khamitskiy vs Kacper Tomaszewski, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.