Ruud Van der Beek vs Marieke Van der Beek
NED, 1996 · Result 0–1 · Queen's Gambit Declined: Three Knights Variation (D37).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Ruud Van der Beek vs Marieke Van der 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 der Beek (2000)
- Black
- Marieke Van der Beek
- Result
- 0–1
- Event
- NED
- Year
- 1996
- Opening
- Queen's Gambit Declined: Three Knights Variation (D37)
About this chess game
This chess game between Ruud Van der Beek (2000) and Marieke Van der Beek was played at NED in 1996 and finished 0–1. The opening was the Queen's Gambit Declined: Three Knights Variation (D37). 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 der Beek games or Marieke Van der Beek games? This Ruud Van der Beek vs Marieke Van der 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 Queen's Gambit Declined: Three Knights Variation.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Ruud Van der Beek vs Marieke Van der Beek?
Ruud Van der Beek vs Marieke Van der Beek (1996) finished 0–1, a win for Marieke Van der Beek.
What opening was played in Ruud Van der Beek vs Marieke Van der Beek?
The game opened with the Queen's Gambit Declined: Three Knights Variation (ECO D37).
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 der Beek vs Marieke Van der Beek, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.