Ruud Van Caspel vs Alexander Van Beek
Donner Memorial, 1996 · Result 1–0 · Benko Gambit Accepted: Fully Accepted Variation (A58).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Ruud Van Caspel vs Alexander Van Beek 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
- Ruud Van Caspel (2148)
- Black
- Alexander Van Beek (2375)
- Result
- 1–0
- Event
- Donner Memorial
- Year
- 1996
- Opening
- Benko Gambit Accepted: Fully Accepted Variation (A58)
About this chess game
This chess game between Ruud Van Caspel (2148) and Alexander Van Beek (2375) was played at Donner Memorial in 1996 and finished 1–0. The opening was the Benko Gambit Accepted: Fully Accepted Variation (A58). 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 Ruud Van Caspel games or Alexander Van Beek games? This Ruud Van Caspel vs Alexander Van Beek 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 Benko Gambit Accepted: Fully Accepted Variation.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Ruud Van Caspel vs Alexander Van Beek?
Ruud Van Caspel vs Alexander Van Beek (1996) finished 1–0, a win for Ruud Van Caspel.
What opening was played in Ruud Van Caspel vs Alexander Van Beek?
The game opened with the Benko Gambit Accepted: Fully Accepted Variation (ECO A58).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Ruud Van Caspel vs Alexander Van Beek, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.