Edward Tanoi vs Xiang Wei William Li
2010 · Result 1–0 · English Opening: Symmetrical Variation, Four Knights Variation (A35).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Edward Tanoi vs Xiang Wei William Li 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
- Edward Tanoi (1769)
- Black
- Xiang Wei William Li (1593)
- Result
- 1–0
- Year
- 2010
- Opening
- English Opening: Symmetrical Variation, Four Knights Variation (A35)
About this chess game
This chess game between Edward Tanoi (1769) and Xiang Wei William Li (1593) was played in 2010 and finished 1–0. The opening was the English Opening: Symmetrical Variation, Four Knights Variation (A35). 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 Edward Tanoi games or Xiang Wei William Li games? This Edward Tanoi vs Xiang Wei William Li 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, Four Knights Variation.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Edward Tanoi vs Xiang Wei William Li?
Edward Tanoi vs Xiang Wei William Li (2010) finished 1–0, a win for Edward Tanoi.
What opening was played in Edward Tanoi vs Xiang Wei William Li?
The game opened with the English Opening: Symmetrical Variation, Four Knights Variation (ECO A35).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Edward Tanoi vs Xiang Wei William Li, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.