Robert Krasiewicz vs Jakub Tobolski
2010 · Result ½–½ · King's Indian Defense: Fianchetto Variation, Classical Main Line (E69).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Robert Krasiewicz vs Jakub Tobolski 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
- Robert Krasiewicz (2035)
- Black
- Jakub Tobolski (2100)
- Result
- ½–½
- Year
- 2010
- Opening
- King's Indian Defense: Fianchetto Variation, Classical Main Line (E69)
About this chess game
This chess game between Robert Krasiewicz (2035) and Jakub Tobolski (2100) was played in 2010 and finished ½–½. The opening was the King's Indian Defense: Fianchetto Variation, Classical Main Line (E69). 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 Robert Krasiewicz games or Jakub Tobolski games? This Robert Krasiewicz vs Jakub Tobolski 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 King's Indian Defense: Fianchetto Variation, Classical Main Line.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Robert Krasiewicz vs Jakub Tobolski?
Robert Krasiewicz vs Jakub Tobolski (2010) finished ½–½, and the game was drawn.
What opening was played in Robert Krasiewicz vs Jakub Tobolski?
The game opened with the King's Indian Defense: Fianchetto Variation, Classical Main Line (ECO E69).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Robert Krasiewicz vs Jakub Tobolski, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.