Matej Pech vs Johan Sautiere
FICGS__CHESS__WCH_STAGE_1_GROUP_05__000008, 2010 · Result 0–1 · Sicilian Defense: Kan Variation, Modern Variation (B42).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Matej Pech vs Johan Sautiere 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
- Matej Pech (1422)
- Black
- Johan Sautiere (1877)
- Result
- 0–1
- Event
- FICGS__CHESS__WCH_STAGE_1_GROUP_05__000008
- Year
- 2010
- Opening
- Sicilian Defense: Kan Variation, Modern Variation (B42)
About this chess game
This chess game between Matej Pech (1422) and Johan Sautiere (1877) was played at FICGS__CHESS__WCH_STAGE_1_GROUP_05__000008 in 2010 and finished 0–1. The opening was the Sicilian Defense: Kan Variation, Modern Variation (B42). 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 Matej Pech games or Johan Sautiere games? This Matej Pech vs Johan Sautiere 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 Sicilian Defense: Kan Variation, Modern Variation.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Matej Pech vs Johan Sautiere?
Matej Pech vs Johan Sautiere (2010) finished 0–1, a win for Johan Sautiere.
What opening was played in Matej Pech vs Johan Sautiere?
The game opened with the Sicilian Defense: Kan Variation, Modern Variation (ECO B42).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Matej Pech vs Johan Sautiere, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.