Glenn Tripp vs Raymond John Burridge
WS/O/565, 2012 · Result 1–0 · King's Indian Defense: Normal Variation, Rare Defenses (E90).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Glenn Tripp vs Raymond John Burridge 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
- Glenn Tripp (1831)
- Black
- Raymond John Burridge (1789)
- Result
- 1–0
- Event
- WS/O/565
- Year
- 2012
- Opening
- King's Indian Defense: Normal Variation, Rare Defenses (E90)
About this chess game
This chess game between Glenn Tripp (1831) and Raymond John Burridge (1789) was played at WS/O/565 in 2012 and finished 1–0. The opening was the King's Indian Defense: Normal Variation, Rare Defenses (E90). 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 Glenn Tripp games or Raymond John Burridge games? This Glenn Tripp vs Raymond John Burridge 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 King's Indian Defense: Normal Variation, Rare Defenses.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Glenn Tripp vs Raymond John Burridge?
Glenn Tripp vs Raymond John Burridge (2012) finished 1–0, a win for Glenn Tripp.
What opening was played in Glenn Tripp vs Raymond John Burridge?
The game opened with the King's Indian Defense: Normal Variation, Rare Defenses (ECO E90).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Glenn Tripp vs Raymond John Burridge, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.