Peter Skibbe vs Joachim Winkler
date unknown · Result 1–0 · English Opening: Symmetrical Variation, Anti-Benoni Variation, Geller Variation (A33).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Peter Skibbe vs Joachim Winkler 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
- Peter Skibbe (1483)
- Black
- Joachim Winkler
- Result
- 1–0
- Opening
- English Opening: Symmetrical Variation, Anti-Benoni Variation, Geller Variation (A33)
About this chess game
This chess game between Peter Skibbe (1483) and Joachim Winkler was played and finished 1–0. The opening was the English Opening: Symmetrical Variation, Anti-Benoni Variation, Geller Variation (A33). 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 Peter Skibbe games or Joachim Winkler games? This Peter Skibbe vs Joachim Winkler 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 English Opening: Symmetrical Variation, Anti-Benoni Variation, Geller Variation.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Peter Skibbe vs Joachim Winkler?
Peter Skibbe vs Joachim Winkler finished 1–0, a win for Peter Skibbe.
What opening was played in Peter Skibbe vs Joachim Winkler?
The game opened with the English Opening: Symmetrical Variation, Anti-Benoni Variation, Geller Variation (ECO A33).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Peter Skibbe vs Joachim Winkler, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.