David Rufino Torres vs Cecilio Soto Palomo
ESP-MEX 2019, 2019 · Result 0–1 · Queen's Pawn Game: Zukertort Variation (D02).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay David Rufino Torres vs Cecilio Soto Palomo 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
- David Rufino Torres (1389)
- Black
- Cecilio Soto Palomo (1803)
- Result
- 0–1
- Event
- ESP-MEX 2019
- Year
- 2019
- Opening
- Queen's Pawn Game: Zukertort Variation (D02)
About this chess game
This chess game between David Rufino Torres (1389) and Cecilio Soto Palomo (1803) was played at ESP-MEX 2019 in 2019 and finished 0–1. The opening was the Queen's Pawn Game: Zukertort Variation (D02). 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 David Rufino Torres games or Cecilio Soto Palomo games? This David Rufino Torres vs Cecilio Soto Palomo 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 Pawn Game: Zukertort Variation.
Frequently asked questions
Who won David Rufino Torres vs Cecilio Soto Palomo?
David Rufino Torres vs Cecilio Soto Palomo (2019) finished 0–1, a win for Cecilio Soto Palomo.
What opening was played in David Rufino Torres vs Cecilio Soto Palomo?
The game opened with the Queen's Pawn Game: Zukertort Variation (ECO D02).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of David Rufino Torres vs Cecilio Soto Palomo, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.