Jakub Piet vs Robert Beekman
38. OKU 2011, 2011 · Result 0–1 · English Opening: Symmetrical Variation, Ultra-Symmetrical Variation (A36).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Jakub Piet vs Robert Beekman 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
- Jakub Piet (2083)
- Black
- Robert Beekman (2249)
- Result
- 0–1
- Event
- 38. OKU 2011
- Year
- 2011
- Opening
- English Opening: Symmetrical Variation, Ultra-Symmetrical Variation (A36)
About this chess game
This chess game between Jakub Piet (2083) and Robert Beekman (2249) was played at 38. OKU 2011 in 2011 and finished 0–1. The opening was the English Opening: Symmetrical Variation, Ultra-Symmetrical Variation (A36). 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 Jakub Piet games or Robert Beekman games? This Jakub Piet vs Robert Beekman 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: Symmetrical Variation, Ultra-Symmetrical Variation.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Jakub Piet vs Robert Beekman?
Jakub Piet vs Robert Beekman (2011) finished 0–1, a win for Robert Beekman.
What opening was played in Jakub Piet vs Robert Beekman?
The game opened with the English Opening: Symmetrical Variation, Ultra-Symmetrical Variation (ECO A36).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Jakub Piet vs Robert Beekman, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.