46th Chess Olympiad · Samarkand, Uzbekistan · 17–27 September 2026

🇧🇷

Brazil

BRA

10 players across 2 squads, heading to Samarkand. This page is theirs — and it stays online after the Olympiad ends.

Open · seed 30 · avg 2531 Women · seed 43 · avg 2137

Make this a live page →

The squad

Brazil at the 46th Chess Olympiad

Open

Seed 30 · average 2531

Captain: Rafael Leitao

Bd	Player	Rating
1	GM Supi, Luis Paulo	2582
2	GM Fier, Alexandr	2566
3	GM Diamant, Andre	2504
4	IM Di Berardino, Diego Rafael	2471
5	IM Molina, Roberto Junio Brito	2398

Women

Seed 43 · average 2137

Captain: Claudionor Alcides Lima Pirola

Bd	Player	Rating
1	FM Terao, Juliana Sayumi	2200
2	FM Alboredo, Julia	2197
3	WIM Librelato, Kathie Goulart	2130
4	Dias, Clara	2022
5	WFM Nunes, Agatha Hurba	1931

Board order is provisional until captains confirm it, and this page updates when it changes. Something wrong here? Tell us and we will fix it the same day.

The federation

Who runs chess in Brazil.

Confederação Brasileira de Xadrez

Avenida Rio Branco, 571, 59026-920 – Natal – RN - Brasil

Website: cbx.org.br
Email: cbxadrez@gmail.com gmdarcylima@gmail.com
Phone: +55 84 8718-8322
Social: X YouTube Facebook
FIDE: Directory entry

Office details as published in the FIDE member-federation directory. 9 officials are listed there. Something out of date? Tell us and we will correct it.

Are these details yours?

If you speak for Brazil, this page is yours to correct and yours to use. Send us your logo and a named contact and we will dress it properly — at no cost.

Claim this page

If Brazil partners with 8by8verse

This page starts moving on 17 September.

Full round reports

Every board covered on its own, the same evening.

Next-round dossiers

What your next opponents have played, before you pair.

Live results here

Each round appears on this page as it finishes.

A team book

The whole Olympiad as a designed PDF when it ends.

There is no cost to your federation and nothing for your officials to do. See the full programme →

Example

What your captain would receive after a round.

Samarkand has not been played yet, so this is a real match from the previous Olympiad — Ghana against Papua New Guinea, round 7 — measured exactly the way Brazil's rounds would be.

Round 7 — Ghana v Papua New Guinea

45th FIDE Chess Olympiad · 18 September 2024

4/4

match score

30.7team average loss per move

9mistakes across the match

4positions lost by two pawns

2boards in severe time trouble

Board by board

Bd	Player	Opponent	Result	Moves	Avg. loss	Flagged	Clock low
1 B	Hasford, John Kojo 1956	Fancy, Stuart 1921	Win	42	46.7	3	51.5%
2 W	Anhwere, Bernard 1893	McCoy, Tom 1883	Win	55	23.8	3	3.1%
3 B	Fomevor, Cephas Clinton 1873	Jones, Rupert 1849	Win	31	36.7	6	8.1%
4 W	Frempong-Smart Daniel 1863	Stuart, Terry	Win	36	15.4	1	42%

Notes for the captain

▸Cleanest game of the round: board 4 (Frempong-Smart Daniel), average centipawn loss 15.4 over 36 moves, no blunders.

▸4 positions swung by more than two pawns across the match; 2 of them on board 1.

▸Boards 2 and 3 dropped below a tenth of the starting clock — the training note for tomorrow.

▸Across the team the middlegame was the most expensive phase (average loss 35.7 per move).

Every game in full

1

Hasford, John Kojo 1956 v Fancy, Stuart 1921

Black · 42 moves · Pirc Defense: Chinese Variation (B07)

Win

46.7average loss per move

19.1opening (to move 15)

67middlegame (16–40)

0endgame (41+)

Move 1 Above the line = better for Hasford Move 42

Where the game turned

16… Ne6 Inaccuracy in the middlegame — cost 61 centipawns. Evaluation went from -0.92 to -0.31.

20… h5 Inaccuracy in the middlegame — cost 61 centipawns. Evaluation went from -0.69 to -0.08.

29… Qxe4 Mistake in the middlegame — cost 187 centipawns. Evaluation went from -1.87 to 0.00.

Clock after move 15: 88.2% After move 30: 62.2% Low point: 51.5%

The complete game, move by move

1. e4 d6 2. d4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. Be2 Nf6 5. g4 Nc6 6. g5 Nd7 7. d5 Nd4 8. Bg4 e5 9. Nf3 c5 10. dxc6 bxc6 11. Be3 c5 12. Nd5 Nb6 13. Bxc8 Rxc8 14. Nxb6 Qxb6 15. b3 O-O 16. c3 Ne6 17. Nd2 Qc6 18. Qg4 f5 19. gxf6 Rxf6 20. h4 h5 21. Qe2 Nf4 22. Qc4+ Kh7 23. O-O-O Rcf8 24. Nf3 Ne2+ 25. Qxe2 Rxf3 26. Rd5 Bh6 27. Bxh6 Kxh6 28. Qd2+ R8f4 29. Rxd6 Qxe4 30. Rg1 Rxf2 31. Rdxg6+ Qxg6 32. Rxg6+ Kxg6 33. Qd6+ Kf5 34. Qxc5 Rxa2 35. Kb1 Rff2 36. Qf8+ Kg4 37. Qg7+ Kxh4 38. Qxe5 Rae2 39. Qd4+ Kh3 40. Qd3+ Kg2 41. Qd5+ Kg1 42. Qg5+ Kf1

Shaded moves are the ones that cost material or position: inaccuracy, mistake, blunder.

2

Anhwere, Bernard 1893 v McCoy, Tom 1883

White · 55 moves · Semi-Slav Defense: Main Line (D45)

Win

23.8average loss per move

7.3opening (to move 15)

27.2middlegame (16–40)

32.8endgame (41+)

Move 1 Above the line = better for Anhwere Move 55

Where the game turned

20. f3 Inaccuracy in the middlegame — cost 66 centipawns. Evaluation went from +0.82 to +0.16.

26. Qc1 Mistake in the middlegame — cost 149 centipawns. Evaluation went from +2.03 to +0.54.

31. Bxd5 Inaccuracy in the middlegame — cost 59 centipawns. Evaluation went from +1.02 to +0.43.

Clock after move 15: 86.6% After move 30: 20.6% Low point: 3.1% — severe time trouble

The complete game, move by move

1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. e3 e6 4. c4 c6 5. Nc3 Bd6 6. Bd3 O-O 7. O-O Nbd7 8. e4 dxe4 9. Nxe4 Nxe4 10. Bxe4 f5 11. Bc2 Nf6 12. Re1 Re8 13. Bg5 h6 14. Bxf6 Qxf6 15. c5 Bc7 16. Ne5 b6 17. cxb6 axb6 18. Nxc6 Bb7 19. Ne5 Qg5 20. f3 Rad8 21. Qd3 Rd6 22. Rad1 Red8 23. Qc4 Bb8 24. Kh1 Rd5 25. Bb3 Qf4 26. Qc1 Bxe5 27. Rxe5 Qxc1 28. Rxc1 Rxe5 29. dxe5 Bd5 30. Rd1 Kf7 31. Bxd5 exd5 32. f4 Rc8 33. h3 Ke6 34. Rd3 Rc4 35. g3 Rc1+ 36. Kg2 Rc2+ 37. Kf3 Rxb2 38. Rb3 Rxa2 39. Rxb6+ Kf7 40. Rb3 Rh2 41. Rb7+ Kf8 42. Rd7 Rd2 43. g4 fxg4+ 44. Kxg4 d4 45. Kf5 g5 46. Kf6 Ke8 47. e6 gxf4 48. Rh7 Kd8 49. Rh8+ Kc7 50. e7 Re2 51. e8=Q Rxe8 52. Rxe8 d3 53. Re1 f3 54. Ke5 d2 55. Rd1 f2 56. Ke4

Shaded moves are the ones that cost material or position: inaccuracy, mistake, blunder.

3

Fomevor, Cephas Clinton 1873 v Jones, Rupert 1849

Black · 31 moves · Caro-Kann Defense: Advance Variation, Botvinnik-Carls Defense (B12)

Win

36.7average loss per move

36.5opening (to move 15)

36.9middlegame (16–40)

—endgame (41+)

Move 1 Above the line = better for Fomevor Move 31

Where the game turned

12… Qf6 Mistake in the opening — cost 170 centipawns. Evaluation went from -1.94 to -0.24.

15… Qxd4 Mistake in the opening — cost 158 centipawns. Evaluation went from -2.22 to -0.64.

20… Be4 Blunder in the middlegame — cost 203 centipawns. Evaluation went from +0.24 to +2.27.

Clock after move 15: 41.1% After move 30: 8.1% Low point: 8.1% — severe time trouble

The complete game, move by move

1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 c5 4. c4 cxd4 5. Nf3 Nc6 6. cxd5 Qa5+ 7. Qd2 Qxd5 8. Nc3 Qd8 9. Nb5 e6 10. Qf4 Bc5 11. Nd6+ Bxd6 12. exd6 Qf6 13. Bb5 Bd7 14. Bxc6 Bxc6 15. Qxd4 Qxd4 16. Nxd4 Bxg2 17. Rg1 Be4 18. Rxg7 Bg6 19. Nxe6 fxe6 20. Bg5 Be4 21. Rd1 Bd5 22. d7+ Kf8 23. Rxg8+ Rxg8 24. d8=Q+ Rxd8 25. Bxd8 Rg1+ 26. Kd2 Rg2 27. Ke3 Rxh2 28. Bf6 a6 29. a3 Kf7 30. Bd8 Rh3+ 31. Kf4 Rf3+

Shaded moves are the ones that cost material or position: inaccuracy, mistake, blunder.

4

Frempong-Smart Daniel 1863 v Stuart, Terry

White · 36 moves · Queen's Pawn Game: Symmetrical Variation, Pseudo-Catalan (D02)

Win

15.4average loss per move

21opening (to move 15)

11.8middlegame (16–40)

—endgame (41+)

Move 1 Above the line = better for Frempong-Smart Daniel Move 36

Where the game turned

15. Na3 Mistake in the opening — cost 150 centipawns. Evaluation went from +1.94 to +0.44.

Clock after move 15: 86.4% After move 30: 42% Low point: 42%

The complete game, move by move

1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. g3 e6 4. Bg2 c5 5. O-O cxd4 6. b3 Nc6 7. Nxd4 e5 8. Nxc6 bxc6 9. c4 Be6 10. Bb2 Bd6 11. Nc3 Bc7 12. cxd5 cxd5 13. Nb5 Bb8 14. Rc1 a6 15. Na3 O-O 16. Nc4 e4 17. Bxf6 Qxf6 18. Nb6 Ra7 19. Nxd5 Qg6 20. Qd4 Rd7 21. Bxe4 Qg5 22. Rfd1 Rfd8 23. Qe3 Qxe3 24. Nxe3 Rxd1+ 25. Rxd1 Rxd1+ 26. Nxd1 Bh3 27. Ne3 g6 28. Nc4 Kg7 29. Bb7 h5 30. Bxa6 g5 31. Bb7 Kg6 32. Be4+ f5 33. Bg2 Bxg2 34. Kxg2 f4 35. Kf3 g4+ 36. Ke4 Kg5 37. Ne5

Shaded moves are the ones that cost material or position: inaccuracy, mistake, blunder.

Average loss per move is how much, on average, each move gave away against the best available move, in hundredths of a pawn — lower is better. Clock low point is the smallest share of the starting time the player had left; below a tenth counts as severe time trouble. A move is only measured when the positions either side of it were both evaluated.

Game records from lichess.org broadcast relays, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. The analysis shown here is shared under the same licence.

Download the full report as a PDF

Example

And the dossier on your next opponents.

The same evening, before the next pairing: every opponent your team is about to face, and every game they have played at the event. Here, Cape Verde before round 8 — built entirely from the live board relay.

IM Ortega Amarelle, Mariano 2453

3/6 so far · average loss 18.3 per move

As White: d4 (2×) As Black: Nf3 d5 (1×) Time trouble: 5 of 6

Rd	Colour	Opponent	Result	Mv	Loss
1	Black	Deac, Bogdan-Daniel 2680 English Opening: Agincourt Defense, Neo-Catalan Declined	Lost	47	29.8 ⏱
2	White	Tchouka, Yakini 1932 King's Indian Attack, with e6	Won	33	20.3 ⏱
3	White	Romanov, Evgeny 2567 Nimzo-Indian Defense: Classical Variation	Lost	53	22.2 ⏱
4	Black	Asante Debesai Zerabruk 1908 Sicilian Defense: Modern Variations	Won	23	9.7
5	Black	Saraci, Nderim 2446 Ruy Lopez: Berlin Defense, Anti-Berlin Variation	Won	64	6 ⏱
6	White	Meier, Georg 2591 Queen's Gambit Declined: Vienna Variation, Quiet Variation	Lost	68	21.7 ⏱

▸Opens d4 in 2 of 3 games as White.

▸Meets Nf3 with d5 most often.

▸Averages 18.3 centipawns lost per move across 6 games.

▸Reached severe time trouble in 5 of 6 games.

▸Longest game so far: 68 moves, round 6.

FM Alho, Diogo 2192

3.5/7 so far · average loss 29.6 per move

As White: d4 (3×) As Black: e4 e6 (2×) Time trouble: 6 of 7

Rd	Colour	Opponent	Result	Mv	Loss
1	White	Shevchenko, Kirill 2673 Indian Defense: Przepiorka Variation	Lost	37	37.8 ⏱
2	Black	Egbe, Kossi Thierry 1847 Modern Defense: Three Pawns Attack	Won	41	34.5 ⏱
3	Black	Lazov, Toni 2360 French Defense: Tarrasch Variation, Guimard Defense, Main Line	Lost	59	34.1 ⏱
4	White	Kibrom Weldegebriel Beraki 1885 Queen's Gambit Declined: Exchange Variation, Positional Variation	Won	30	15.7
5	White	Ondozi, Murtez 2371 Semi-Slav Defense	Drew	99	15.8 ⏱
6	Black	Rodriguez Vila, Andres 2417 French Defense: Chigorin Variation	Won	59	41.4 ⏱
7	Black	Barrish, Daniel 2281 Nimzo-Indian Defense: Classical Variation, Noa Variation	Lost	51	28.1 ⏱

▸Opens d4 in 3 of 3 games as White.

▸Meets e4 with e6 most often.

▸Averages 29.6 centipawns lost per move across 7 games.

▸Reached severe time trouble in 6 of 7 games.

▸Longest game so far: 99 moves, round 5.

Vaz, Jose Carlos 1909

2.5/6 so far · average loss 31.3 per move

As White: e4 (4×) As Black: Nf3 Nc6 (1×) Time trouble: 2 of 6

Rd	Colour	Opponent	Result	Mv	Loss
1	White	Parligras, Mircea-Emilian 2537 Sicilian Defense: Moscow Variation	Lost	51	19.2 ⏱
2	Black	Semeko, Lumen Paco 1740 Zukertort Opening: Black Mustang Defense	Drew	66	39.8
4	White	Samuel Merhawi Gebrehiwet 1788 Sicilian Defense: Dragon Variation, Yugoslav Attack, Belezky Line	Won	52	38.3
5	White	Fejzullahu, Afrim 2221 Four Knights Game: Scotch Variation Accepted	Won	48	16.8 ⏱
6	White	Roselli Mailhe, Bernardo 2362 French Defense: Exchange Variation	Lost	58	31.2
7	Black	Levitan, Caleb Levi 2193 Sicilian Defense: Four Knights Variation	Lost	69	42.4

▸Opens e4 in 4 of 4 games as White.

▸Meets Nf3 with Nc6 most often.

▸Averages 31.3 centipawns lost per move across 6 games.

▸Reached severe time trouble in 2 of 6 games.

▸Longest game so far: 69 moves, round 7.

Mirulla, David 1904

2/6 so far · average loss 30.4 per move

As White: e4 (3×) As Black: e4 e5 (2×) Time trouble: 5 of 6

Rd	Colour	Opponent	Result	Mv	Loss
1	Black	Lupulescu, Constantin 2590 King's Indian Defense: Semi-Averbakh System	Lost	23	44.4 ⏱
2	White	Amewounou, Komlan Kouessan 1825 Italian Game: Classical Variation, Giuoco Pianissimo	Won	27	6.6 ⏱
3	White	Risteski, Emil 2367 Sicilian Defense: Classical Variation	Lost	27	52.1 ⏱
4	Black	Lilay Weldu Gebru 1977 Ruy Lopez: Marshall Attack, Original Marshall Attack	Won	27	13 ⏱
5	Black	Uruci, Endrit 2348 Italian Game: Scotch Gambit, Max Lange Attack	Lost	33	29.4
7	White	Karsten, Jan 2311 Sicilian Defense: Najdorf Variation, Adams Attack	Lost	44	36.8 ⏱

▸Opens e4 in 3 of 3 games as White.

▸Meets e4 with e5 most often.

▸Averages 30.4 centipawns lost per move across 6 games.

▸Reached severe time trouble in 5 of 6 games.

▸Longest game so far: 44 moves, round 7.

Example

And what actually scores against them.

Knowing an opponent opens 1.d4 is half the work. The other half is knowing how 1.d4 has gone at this event — across every game played, between players of your team's own standard.

IM Ortega Amarelle, Mariano 2453

Opens 1.d4 — 2 times at this event

Across the whole Olympiad, 1.d4 was played 1,362 times and White scored 53.4%.

How Black answered it

Reply	Games	Black scored
1…Nf6	832	49.4%
1…d5	402	43.3%
1…e6	44	36.4%

With Black, they have met Nf3 d5 1 time here.

FM Alho, Diogo 2192

Opens 1.d4 — 3 times at this event

Across the whole Olympiad, 1.d4 was played 1,362 times and White scored 53.4%.

How Black answered it

Reply	Games	Black scored
1…Nf6	832	49.4%
1…d5	402	43.3%
1…e6	44	36.4%

With Black, they have met e4 e6 2 times here.

Vaz, Jose Carlos 1909

Opens 1.e4 — 4 times at this event

Across the whole Olympiad, 1.e4 was played 1,949 times and White scored 51.3%.

How Black answered it

Reply	Games	Black scored
1…c5	830	53.0%
1…c6	259	51.2%
1…e6	166	50.6%

With Black, they have met Nf3 Nc6 1 time here.

Mirulla, David 1904

Opens 1.e4 — 3 times at this event

Across the whole Olympiad, 1.e4 was played 1,949 times and White scored 51.3%.

How Black answered it

Reply	Games	Black scored
1…c5	830	53.0%
1…c6	259	51.2%
1…e6	166	50.6%

With Black, they have met e4 e5 2 times here.

Scores are from 3,941 games at 45th Chess Olympiad, Budapest 2024 — every relayed game of the Open section — players of the same standard as your team, not grandmasters. Lines played fewer than 25 times are left out rather than reported as a trend. Which opening suits your player is your call; these are the numbers behind it.

Example

Each player across the whole event.

By the rest day the question changes: is this player holding up? Every round they have played, how cleanly they played it, and what changed between the first half and the second. Here, Ghana across all 11 rounds.

FM Hasford, John Kojo 1956

3/9 · average loss 34.4 per move

1

2

4

5

7

8

9

10

11

Taller is better — each bar is one round, inverted so a clean game stands tall. Green won, grey drew, orange lost.

▸Average loss per move fell from 36.5 in the first half to 31.9 in the second.

Every round in detail

Rd	Col	Opponent	Result	Mv	Avg. loss	Clock low
1	B	Fawzy, Adham 2507 Pirc Defense: Austrian Attack	Lost	38	44.8	7.2% ⏱
2	W	Khoder, Akram 2239 Slav Defense: Czech Variation, Dutch Variation	Lost	63	28.2	5.7% ⏱
4	B	Alfaro, William 2133 King's Indian Defense: Fianchetto Variation, Panno Variation	Lost	24	37	65.1%
5	W	Moncur, Cecil 1839 Queen's Pawn Game: Modern Defense	Drew	35	25.7	39.4%
7	B	Fancy, Stuart 1921 Pirc Defense: Chinese Variation	Won	42	46.7	51.5%
8	B	Ortega Amarelle, Mariano 2453 Czech Defense	Lost	27	45.6	42.7%
9	W	De Mey, Juan Pablo 1992 Queen's Gambit Declined: Three Knights, Vienna Variation	Drew	51	18.2	32.5%
10	W	Ah-Kye, Benitot Emmanuel 1815 Indian Defense: Knights Variation	Won	49	13.9	59.1%
11	B	Kudakwashe Chinake 1859 Queen's Pawn Game	Lost	43	49.9	48.4%

IM Anquandah, Francis Eric 1941

3/9 · average loss 28.9 per move

1

2

3

4

6

8

9

10

11

Taller is better — each bar is one round, inverted so a clean game stands tall. Green won, grey drew, orange lost.

▸Steady across the event — 29.1 per move in the first half, 28.6 in the second.

Every round in detail

Rd	Col	Opponent	Result	Mv	Avg. loss	Clock low
1	W	Wageih, Kareim 2402 Caro-Kann Defense: Karpov Variation	Drew	70	7.2	17.5%
2	B	Arkadan, Adib 2181 Queen's Gambit Declined: Modern Variation, Normal Line	Lost	43	46.6	7.2% ⏱
3	B	Sihlongonyane, Sikhanyiso 1813 Scandinavian Defense: Main Line	Drew	69	22.5	0.7% ⏱
4	W	Rocha, Maximiliano 2156 Italian Game: Paris Defense	Drew	52	19.8	3.3% ⏱
6	W	Pace, Colin 2186 Sicilian Defense: Accelerated Dragon, Exchange Variation	Lost	49	49.2	31.2%
8	W	Alho, Diogo 2192 Sicilian Defense	Lost	42	39	4.4% ⏱
9	B	Stetsenko, Ilya 1903 Catalan Opening: Closed, Main Line	Lost	31	42.4	17.5%
10	B	Chinasamy, Devarajen 1975 Rapport-Jobava System	Drew	38	15.7	19.2%
11	W	Young, Christopher 1758 Sicilian Defense: Kan Variation, Modern Variation	Won	40	17.4	3.5% ⏱

Anhwere, Bernard 1893

4/9 · average loss 36 per move

1

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

11

Taller is better — each bar is one round, inverted so a clean game stands tall. Green won, grey drew, orange lost.

▸Average loss per move fell from 37.8 in the first half to 33.9 in the second.

Every round in detail

Rd	Col	Opponent	Result	Mv	Avg. loss	Clock low
1	B	Wafa, Hamed 2368 Sicilian Defense: Richter-Rauzer Variation, Neo-Modern Variation, Early Deviations	Lost	28	53.8	0.8% ⏱
3	W	Mbongeni, Mabuza 1784 Indian Defense: Knights Variation	Lost	46	53	6.1% ⏱
4	B	Sanchez, Steven 2072 King's Indian Attack: Symmetrical Defense	Lost	39	26.8	13.6%
5	B	Ferguson, Joseph 1797 Nimzo-Larsen Attack: Indian Variation	Won	41	12.9	32.6%
6	B	Darmanin, Jake 2119 Sicilian Defense: Delayed Alapin Variation, with d6	Drew	56	42.3	7.1% ⏱
7	W	McCoy, Tom 1883 Semi-Slav Defense: Main Line	Won	55	23.8	3.1% ⏱
8	B	Mirulla, David 1904 Sicilian Defense: Najdorf Variation, Adams Attack	Won	50	26	5.3% ⏱
9	W	Pesqueira, Jose 1880 King's Indian Defense: Fianchetto Variation, Classical Fianchetto	Drew	38	22.6	9.9% ⏱
11	B	Shaw, Clifford 1744 Sicilian Defense: Smith-Morra Gambit Accepted, Pin Defense	Lost	13	63.2	50%

Fomevor, Cephas Clinton 1873

4.5/9 · average loss 29.9 per move

1

2

3

5

6

7

9

10

11

Taller is better — each bar is one round, inverted so a clean game stands tall. Green won, grey drew, orange lost.

▸Steady across the event — 30.5 per move in the first half, 29.1 in the second.

Every round in detail

Rd	Col	Opponent	Result	Mv	Avg. loss	Clock low
1	W	Sadek, Sameh 2269 Slav Defense	Lost	52	25.8	0.6% ⏱
2	W	Assaad, Joe 2150 Nimzo-Indian Defense: Classical Variation	Lost	49	36.1	0.6% ⏱
3	B	Nxumalo, Vuyo 1746 Réti Opening: Anglo-Slav Variation, New York System	Won	46	29	0.6% ⏱
5	W	Pride, Avian 1742 Semi-Slav Defense	Won	30	26	18.2%
6	W	Novak, Attila Robert 2135 Queen's Gambit Accepted: Classical Defense, Main Line	Lost	33	35.8	0.6% ⏱
7	B	Jones, Rupert 1849 Caro-Kann Defense: Advance Variation, Botvinnik-Carls Defense	Won	31	36.7	8.1% ⏱
9	B	Antonio, Kyell-Jean 1763 Caro-Kann Defense: Advance Variation, Botvinnik-Carls Defense	Drew	30	9.7	9.9% ⏱
10	W	Lam Kin Cheung, Stephane 1677 Benoni Defense: Old Benoni	Lost	56	46.8	4% ⏱
11	W	Tracey, Shaun M 1684 Dutch Defense: Classical Variation	Won	59	23	1.9% ⏱

Frempong-Smart Daniel 1863

3.5/8 · average loss 39.2 per move

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

10

Taller is better — each bar is one round, inverted so a clean game stands tall. Green won, grey drew, orange lost.

▸Average loss per move rose from 36.1 in the first half to 42.3 in the second.

Every round in detail

Rd	Col	Opponent	Result	Mv	Avg. loss	Clock low
2	B	Kassis, Antoine 2085 Petrov's Defense: Modern Attack	Lost	50	36.8	7.6% ⏱
3	W	Mtsetfwa Philani 1688 Queen's Pawn Game: Symmetrical Variation, Pseudo-Catalan	Won	104	38.5	0.7% ⏱
4	W	Ortiz, Marcos 2191 Queen's Pawn Game: Symmetrical Variation, Pseudo-Catalan	Lost	35	36.9	28.6%
5	B	Whyms, Chapell 1701 Slav Defense: Chebanenko Variation	Won	38	32.1	14.3%
6	B	Mizzi, Jack 2053 Slav Defense: Chebanenko Variation	Drew	77	24.8	16%
7	W	Stuart, Terry Queen's Pawn Game: Symmetrical Variation, Pseudo-Catalan	Won	36	15.4	42%
8	W	Vaz, Jose Carlos 1909 Queen's Pawn Game: Symmetrical Variation, Pseudo-Catalan	Lost	28	91.7	49.4%
10	B	Lee Luen Mang, Stefan 1803 Slav Defense: Modern Line	Lost	32	37.3	52.7%

What's next?

If you speak for Brazil, one short form puts your team on the partner list.

Apply for Brazil

Browse other federations