Mike Stubbs vs Michael Charles Dudley
WS/CCE/B/20, 2022 · Result ½–½ · Modern Defense: Averbakh Variation, Pseudo-Sämisch (A42).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Mike Stubbs vs Michael Charles Dudley 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
- Mike Stubbs (2074)
- Black
- Michael Charles Dudley (2064)
- Result
- ½–½
- Event
- WS/CCE/B/20
- Year
- 2022
- Opening
- Modern Defense: Averbakh Variation, Pseudo-Sämisch (A42)
About this chess game
This chess game between Mike Stubbs (2074) and Michael Charles Dudley (2064) was played at WS/CCE/B/20 in 2022 and finished ½–½. The opening was the Modern Defense: Averbakh Variation, Pseudo-Sämisch (A42). 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 Mike Stubbs games or Michael Charles Dudley games? This Mike Stubbs vs Michael Charles Dudley 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 Modern Defense: Averbakh Variation, Pseudo-Sämisch.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Mike Stubbs vs Michael Charles Dudley?
Mike Stubbs vs Michael Charles Dudley (2022) finished ½–½, and the game was drawn.
What opening was played in Mike Stubbs vs Michael Charles Dudley?
The game opened with the Modern Defense: Averbakh Variation, Pseudo-Sämisch (ECO A42).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Mike Stubbs vs Michael Charles Dudley, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.