Daniel Kottwitz vs Alexander Fuchs
St Ingbert Open, 1994 · Result 0–1 · French Defense: Classical Variation, Normal Variation (C13).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Daniel Kottwitz vs Alexander Fuchs 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
- Daniel Kottwitz (2155)
- Black
- Alexander Fuchs (2065)
- Result
- 0–1
- Event
- St Ingbert Open
- Year
- 1994
- Opening
- French Defense: Classical Variation, Normal Variation (C13)
About this chess game
This chess game between Daniel Kottwitz (2155) and Alexander Fuchs (2065) was played at St Ingbert Open in 1994 and finished 0–1. The opening was the French Defense: Classical Variation, Normal Variation (C13). 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 Daniel Kottwitz games or Alexander Fuchs games? This Daniel Kottwitz vs Alexander Fuchs 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 French Defense: Classical Variation, Normal Variation.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Daniel Kottwitz vs Alexander Fuchs?
Daniel Kottwitz vs Alexander Fuchs (1994) finished 0–1, a win for Alexander Fuchs.
What opening was played in Daniel Kottwitz vs Alexander Fuchs?
The game opened with the French Defense: Classical Variation, Normal Variation (ECO C13).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Daniel Kottwitz vs Alexander Fuchs, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.