Alex Dac-Vuong Nguyen vs Johannes Feldmann
2020 · Result ½–½ · Italian Game: Two Knights Defense, Polerio Defense (C58).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Alex Dac-Vuong Nguyen vs Johannes Feldmann 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
- Alex Dac-Vuong Nguyen (2362)
- Black
- Johannes Feldmann (2196)
- Result
- ½–½
- Year
- 2020
- Opening
- Italian Game: Two Knights Defense, Polerio Defense (C58)
About this chess game
This chess game between Alex Dac-Vuong Nguyen (2362) and Johannes Feldmann (2196) was played in 2020 and finished ½–½. The opening was the Italian Game: Two Knights Defense, Polerio Defense (C58). 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 Alex Dac-Vuong Nguyen games or Johannes Feldmann games? This Alex Dac-Vuong Nguyen vs Johannes Feldmann 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 Italian Game: Two Knights Defense, Polerio Defense.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Alex Dac-Vuong Nguyen vs Johannes Feldmann?
Alex Dac-Vuong Nguyen vs Johannes Feldmann (2020) finished ½–½, and the game was drawn.
What opening was played in Alex Dac-Vuong Nguyen vs Johannes Feldmann?
The game opened with the Italian Game: Two Knights Defense, Polerio Defense (ECO C58).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Alex Dac-Vuong Nguyen vs Johannes Feldmann, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.