Pascal Roques vs Claudio Correa De Almeida
9. LSS Anni P-00013, 2015 · Result 1–0 · Sicilian Defense: O'Kelly Variation (B28).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Pascal Roques vs Claudio Correa De Almeida 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
- Pascal Roques (1953)
- Black
- Claudio Correa De Almeida (1586)
- Result
- 1–0
- Event
- 9. LSS Anni P-00013
- Year
- 2015
- Opening
- Sicilian Defense: O'Kelly Variation (B28)
About this chess game
This chess game between Pascal Roques (1953) and Claudio Correa De Almeida (1586) was played at 9. LSS Anni P-00013 in 2015 and finished 1–0. The opening was the Sicilian Defense: O'Kelly Variation (B28). 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 Pascal Roques games or Claudio Correa De Almeida games? This Pascal Roques vs Claudio Correa De Almeida 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: O'Kelly Variation.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Pascal Roques vs Claudio Correa De Almeida?
Pascal Roques vs Claudio Correa De Almeida (2015) finished 1–0, a win for Pascal Roques.
What opening was played in Pascal Roques vs Claudio Correa De Almeida?
The game opened with the Sicilian Defense: O'Kelly Variation (ECO B28).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Pascal Roques vs Claudio Correa De Almeida, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.