Daniel Sadzikowski vs Jakub Szostko
2015 · Result ½–½ · Queen's Gambit Declined: Exchange Variation, Reshevsky Variation (D36).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Daniel Sadzikowski vs Jakub Szostko 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
- Daniel Sadzikowski (2498)
- Black
- Jakub Szostko (2153)
- Result
- ½–½
- Year
- 2015
- Opening
- Queen's Gambit Declined: Exchange Variation, Reshevsky Variation (D36)
About this chess game
This chess game between Daniel Sadzikowski (2498) and Jakub Szostko (2153) was played in 2015 and finished ½–½. The opening was the Queen's Gambit Declined: Exchange Variation, Reshevsky Variation (D36). 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 Daniel Sadzikowski games or Jakub Szostko games? This Daniel Sadzikowski vs Jakub Szostko 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: Exchange Variation, Reshevsky Variation.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Daniel Sadzikowski vs Jakub Szostko?
Daniel Sadzikowski vs Jakub Szostko (2015) finished ½–½, and the game was drawn.
What opening was played in Daniel Sadzikowski vs Jakub Szostko?
The game opened with the Queen's Gambit Declined: Exchange Variation, Reshevsky Variation (ECO D36).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Daniel Sadzikowski vs Jakub Szostko, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.