|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
Apr-03-06
 |
| pawn to QB4: I'll leave Fritz in its cage and guess 15.Nd5 Nf7 16.Nxf6+ leaves you tossing up between 16...Bxf6 17.Bxf8  and ...exf6 18.Bc4 with a winning attack. After 19.Be2 Rf2 20.Qc3 e5 I'd try 21.Bxg4, e.g. Qg5+ 22.Kb1 Qxg4 23.Nf5+ gxf5 24.Rg1 Rg2 25.Rxg2 and 26.Qc7, though no doubt there are numerous other variations. |
 |
| Apr-03-06 |
| Kwesi: <pawn to QB4> I like the 23.Nf5+ idea in your line and the position after 26.Qc7 looks probably equal at first glance, so maybe 17...Nexg4 wasn't that good after all :( |
|
| Apr-05-06 |
| Jonber: 19.Be2 Rf2 would be the right approach for Black; however, as pointed out by <pawn to QB4>, White would not be obligated to respond to 20.Qc3 e5 with 21.Nc6?, but would instead play 21.Bxg4. A sample line could go: 19.Be2 Rf2 20.Qc3 e5 21.Bxg4 Bxg4 (Often the simplest is best; 21
Qg5+ fails as demonstrated by <pawn to QB4>) 22.Rd2 Rxd2 23.Qxd2 Qc7 (And not 23...exd4 24.Qh6+ Kf6 25.Qh4+ Ke5 26.Qxg4) 24.Nb3  I've come to reassess my opinion on the above line somewhat though. At first I said, somewhat arbitrarily, that it was equal, but it seems clear that Black will have a small advantage. Certainly a smaller advantage than with the text move though. You say the Silicon Monstrosity advocates not taking the offered knight on g4 right away. That confounds me greatly. Which Silicon Monstrosity are we dealing with here (Fritz?) and what move does it propose instead? I really can't see any substitute for 18.fxg4. |
|
Apr-05-06
|
| pawn to QB4: Just a slight mix up, Jonber. <the silicon monstrosity advocates not taking the ...Knight on g4>; Fritz (for it is he)actually objects to offering it by 17...Nxg4, recommending 17...Qb6. My fault for asking the thing. |
|
| Apr-05-06 |
| Jonber: Ah, that clarifies things. Good thing too, I was almost beginning to think I was going blind. :) |
|
| May-18-06 |
| soughzin: I'm not extremely booked up on this very deep complex but I do try the basic ideas of it often against the sicilian(or pirc). Often I find that when I push the kingside pawns, the f6 knight hops to h6 and is firmly planted there. What is a good way of preventing this? If it becomes a race to attack each wing and my side is stifled it obviously means bad news so if anyone can offer some advice it would be appreciated. |
|
May-18-06
 |
| KingG: <soughzin> I assume you meant that the knight hops to h5. Anyway, if you have already exchanged off your h-pawn, then more often than not, the best thing to do is to sacrifice the exchange by playing Rxh5. It is an extremely common sac in these kind of positions. Look at Fischer's games against the Dragon for example, he was very fond of this sacrifice. Karpov also played it many times and was a great expert in defeating the Dragon(as was Fischer). By playing through their games, you will get a feel for the correct continuations after the sacrifice. |
|
May-18-06
 |
| Mating Net: As <KingG> stated: Sac, sac mate, Dragon's fate:) |
|
May-18-06
 |
| Akavall: <soughzin> Take a look at this game, it has a thematic rook sacrifice that <KingG> is talking about, and of course the famous 26. Rf5!! Karpov vs E Gik, 1968
|
|
| Sep-02-06 |
| Tariqov: <Kwesi> I am an experienced dragon player(i've played it for a long time), this are my comments on your game.
1.e4c5
.....
.....(the opening moves i skip)
9.0-0-0 Bd7?!(this is your first inaccuracy the right move is 9..d5! opening the position and exploiting the fact that White hasn't played Bc4)10.g4 White is better(correctly played by White, Bc4? is a mistake, Black's plan on the Queenside is Rc8,Ne5,Nc4 not like ..Rb8? as played, if Bc4? then the plan rc8-Nc4 gains tempo) and white suddenly blunders with 15.Bxg7?? and i have no comments after that. |
|
| Sep-02-06 |
| Nikita Smirnov: I think i have played the Yougoslav attck in Najdorf but the question is:Is there a difference bettwen The Najdorf Yougoslav and the Dragon Yougoslav? |
|
| Sep-03-06 |
| NateDawg: <Nikita Smirnov> In the Najdorf Variation, the opening with Be3, Qd2, and f3 is called the English Attack. The main line goes 1. e4 c5 2.  f3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. xd4 f6 5. c3 a6 6.  e3 e6 7.  d2 b5 8. f3.According to "Standard Chess Openings" by Eric Schiller, "The ideas are similar to those of the Yugoslav Attack in the Dragon Variation, except that Black has not fianchettoed on the kingside and instead has played ...e6. White will castle queenside and launch a pawnstorm with g4 and h4. Unlike the Yugoslav Attack, however, the onslaught takes longer to reach the enemy king, who has not weakened his protective pawn barrier. Black will therefore have extra time to attack on the queenside, but does not have the power of a bishop at g7 to call on, so it is much harder to create sufficient pressure at c3." |
|
| Sep-06-06 |
| Nikita Smirnov: Okej sorry but i didn't knew the difference.But it was something in the Najdorf called the yougoslav attack. |
|
| Jan-24-07 |
| James Bowman: Seeing that we have a rich resource in chessgames.com's database I like to check the players who most frequently use a certain opening or defence and see how they fare with it. By the players listed here anthony Miles etc.. it does not look so good for the poor old Dragon. My own experience since adopting the yugoslav as my standard answer to the Dragon has born this out. I usually have far better than even odds against players up to 200 points higher than me after that it evens out but even then my opponents only win with much difficulty usually. My opinion is that the Dragon for now is unsound, not that someone can not win with it, but then again people win with H4, but that doesn't prove its sound either. |
|
| Jan-24-07 |
| Kean: i think some Dragon-players see h5 as an antidote against h4, which then seem solid enough for a while |
|
| Jan-24-07 |
| soughzin: I think James means some people play 1.h4 and win, but it doesn't mean it's good. |
|
| Jan-26-07 |
| James Bowman: <yes Soughzin> that was my point exactly |
|
| Mar-20-07 |
| LazyNinja: Hey guys. Anybody here play on Chess Live or FICS? I play as NimzoCapa on both (mostly Chess Live now, but also some on FICS in response to specific challenges). Anyway, I play both sides of the Yugoslav Attack and know a lot of the theory pretty deep and would love to get in some good practice games. I'm rated at about 1900 USCF (hopefully a bit stronger in my favorite opening). Think the Dragon's dead? I'd be glad to try to prove anybody wrong. (Though if you're Kasparov you're still going to beat me after I equalize, obviously.) |
|
| Mar-20-07 |
| LazyNinja: Hey SicilianDragon:
There's some stuff about Bh6 in the Soltis in IM Martin's new Dragon book. (Mostly not as good as Dearing's but it has a couple interesting lines and analysis.) Anyway, he gives some analysis claiming a refutation to the Nc4 variation. Some sort of improvement involving Rxh8. Have you looked at that line? |
|
Dec-28-07
 |
| Cactus: In the line
1. e4 c5
2. Nf3 d6
3. d4 cxd4
4. Nxd4 Nf6
5. Nc3 g6
6. Be3 Bg7
7. f3 O-O
8. Qd2 Nc6
9. g4 Be6
10.Nxe6?! is played very rarely. I've seen all of the games in the database of this, and it seems like white gains a significant advantage. I know a lot of dragon theory, but it seems like dragon books are very scarce on this move (IM Martin's book doesn't mention it at all). What is it that makes white players aprehensive regarding this move? |
|
| Jan-27-08 |
| belgradegambit: <Cactus: In the line
1. e4 c5
2. Nf3 d6
3. d4 cxd4
4. Nxd4 Nf6
5. Nc3 g6
6. Be3 Bg7
7. f3 O-O
8. Qd2 Nc6
9. g4 Be6
10.Nxe6?! is played very rarely. I've seen all of the games in the database of this, and it seems like white gains a significant advantage. I know a lot of dragon theory, but it seems like dragon books are very scarce on this move (IM Martin's book doesn't mention it at all). What is it that makes white players aprehensive regarding this move?>Black's e6 pawn in this case is not weak since the white bishop can't attack from h3 as in the non-9.g4 variations. See games like this Sveshnikov vs Van der Wiel, 1980 |
|
Apr-01-08
|
| Cactus: <belgrade> Thanks!
<Tariqov> Actually, 9...Bd7 is <not> an inaccuracy, and is becoming quite popular. As well, black's plan isn't Ne5, Nc4 in this position, because white hasn't played Bc4 and Bb3, and thus would be two tempi us. Since I don't play 9...Bd7, I can only vaguely recall, but black plays ...Na5, Nxb3, and advances the queenside pawns |
|
| Jun-09-08 |
| offtherook: I must say, to anyone considering the Dragon, it might not be the best option. Players who are much stronger than I am have lost games to me because of this openingthe Yugoslav attack is just so easy and so effective, that you REALLY have to be much better than your opponent to make the Dragon work. It's pretty easy to trade off dark bishops, and from that point White should be able to at least hold the draw. When I play Sicilian, I normally go Najdorf/Scheveningen. Those seem to work out better in my experience. |
|
| Jul-20-08 |
| belgradegambit: <offtherook> I guess Magnus Carlsen disagrees with you.
The lack of popularity in the past several years has been a boon to us Dragon players. When I play on the ICC I find a lot of White players "kinda" know the Yugoslav attack. They get splattered by the tactics every time. |
|
Jul-20-08
 |
| lorker: some lines of the dragon ( like the chinese dragon) may be slightly worse for black fi white plays perfectly, but in general they will work well anyway, since most people do not enough theory to outplay these players. And certainly the mainline Rc8 line cannot be bad for black ( Kasparov and Tiviakov have won many games with it). The dragon has many variations and I do not believe it is unsound. It is risky yes, and black must be prepared to go all in in some lines but in general as a dragon player I feel like I win more games with the opening than I lose. I do not think it is unsound at all. |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
