Jon Lavis vs Julio Cesar Jara
SC-00100, 2011 · Result 0–1 · English Opening: King's English Variation, Reversed Closed Sicilian (A25).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Jon Lavis vs Julio Cesar Jara 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
- Jon Lavis (1794)
- Black
- Julio Cesar Jara (1805)
- Result
- 0–1
- Event
- SC-00100
- Year
- 2011
- Opening
- English Opening: King's English Variation, Reversed Closed Sicilian (A25)
About this chess game
This chess game between Jon Lavis (1794) and Julio Cesar Jara (1805) was played at SC-00100 in 2011 and finished 0–1. The opening was the English Opening: King's English Variation, Reversed Closed Sicilian (A25). 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 Jon Lavis games or Julio Cesar Jara games? This Jon Lavis vs Julio Cesar Jara 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: King's English Variation, Reversed Closed Sicilian.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Jon Lavis vs Julio Cesar Jara?
Jon Lavis vs Julio Cesar Jara (2011) finished 0–1, a win for Julio Cesar Jara.
What opening was played in Jon Lavis vs Julio Cesar Jara?
The game opened with the English Opening: King's English Variation, Reversed Closed Sicilian (ECO A25).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Jon Lavis vs Julio Cesar Jara, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.