Cesary Zolendowski vs Joao Guimares Carvalho
4. LSS Anni P-00009, 2010 · Result 1–0 · Sicilian Defense: Sozin Attack (B86).
Turn this game into your next win
Replay Cesary Zolendowski vs Joao Guimares Carvalho 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
- Cesary Zolendowski (2184)
- Black
- Joao Guimares Carvalho (1351)
- Result
- 1–0
- Event
- 4. LSS Anni P-00009
- Year
- 2010
- Opening
- Sicilian Defense: Sozin Attack (B86)
About this chess game
This chess game between Cesary Zolendowski (2184) and Joao Guimares Carvalho (1351) was played at 4. LSS Anni P-00009 in 2010 and finished 1–0. The opening was the Sicilian Defense: Sozin Attack (B86). 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 Cesary Zolendowski games or Joao Guimares Carvalho games? This Cesary Zolendowski vs Joao Guimares Carvalho 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 Sicilian Defense: Sozin Attack.
Frequently asked questions
Who won Cesary Zolendowski vs Joao Guimares Carvalho?
Cesary Zolendowski vs Joao Guimares Carvalho (2010) finished 1–0, a win for Cesary Zolendowski.
What opening was played in Cesary Zolendowski vs Joao Guimares Carvalho?
The game opened with the Sicilian Defense: Sozin Attack (ECO B86).
Can I replay this chess game move by move?
Yes. Use the interactive board on this page to step through every move of Cesary Zolendowski vs Joao Guimares Carvalho, or open it on the CipherChess analysis board to review it with the Stockfish engine.