Luis Fernando Rosero Zapata vs Alcides Pena
2015 · Result 0–1 · Queen's Gambit Declined: Three Knights Variation (D37).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Luis Fernando Rosero Zapata vs Alcides Pena 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
- Luis Fernando Rosero Zapata (2034)
- Black
- Alcides Pena (1810)
- Result
- 0–1
- Year
- 2015
- Opening
- Queen's Gambit Declined: Three Knights Variation (D37)
About this chess game
This chess game between Luis Fernando Rosero Zapata (2034) and Alcides Pena (1810) was played in 2015 and finished 0–1. The opening was the Queen's Gambit Declined: Three Knights Variation (D37). 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 Luis Fernando Rosero Zapata games or Alcides Pena games? This Luis Fernando Rosero Zapata vs Alcides Pena 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 Queen's Gambit Declined: Three Knights Variation.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Luis Fernando Rosero Zapata vs Alcides Pena?
Luis Fernando Rosero Zapata vs Alcides Pena (2015) finished 0–1, a win for Alcides Pena.
What opening was played in Luis Fernando Rosero Zapata vs Alcides Pena?
The game opened with the Queen's Gambit Declined: Three Knights Variation (ECO D37).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Luis Fernando Rosero Zapata vs Alcides Pena, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.