Robert Rodling vs Thomas Porschberg
4. South Bohemia Open, 2010 · Result 0–1 · Benko Gambit Accepted: Fully Accepted Variation (A58).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Robert Rodling vs Thomas Porschberg 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 Rodling (1765)
- Black
- Thomas Porschberg (2005)
- Result
- 0–1
- Event
- 4. South Bohemia Open
- Year
- 2010
- Opening
- Benko Gambit Accepted: Fully Accepted Variation (A58)
About this chess game
This chess game between Robert Rodling (1765) and Thomas Porschberg (2005) was played at 4. South Bohemia Open in 2010 and finished 0–1. The opening was the Benko Gambit Accepted: Fully Accepted Variation (A58). 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 Rodling games or Thomas Porschberg games? This Robert Rodling vs Thomas Porschberg 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 Benko Gambit Accepted: Fully Accepted Variation.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Robert Rodling vs Thomas Porschberg?
Robert Rodling vs Thomas Porschberg (2010) finished 0–1, a win for Thomas Porschberg.
What opening was played in Robert Rodling vs Thomas Porschberg?
The game opened with the Benko Gambit Accepted: Fully Accepted Variation (ECO A58).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Robert Rodling vs Thomas Porschberg, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.