Any comments on the opening.  Not really clear whether the pawn sac is sound.  It seems analogous to some others I have seen.  But, don't think I have actually seen it before

Btw...there is a neat sacrifice if white plays 8. f3, NxC3! followed by axb and bxc winning back the piece

I don't think the pawn sac is good. maybe in blitz it's fine. if you like accelerated dragon, get GM Dzindzichasvili's DVD called "New and Improved Accelerated Dragon". my blitz is really rusty right now, keeping losing on time.

 This was a 15 min game....At any rate.  Any REASONS for the sac not being good.  If all you can say is it isn't good then I disagree.  If you can give me a good reason I am willing to listen. 

it just seems to me you gave a pawn and didn't get much of any compensation. I think if this pawn sac was sound it would be very widely known and talked about a lot, since it would come about in one of the most popular and widely played chess varations of all time. this and GM Dzindzi doesn't mention anything about it in his dvd and he's a GM and he basically spent weeks analyzing all variations of the accelerated dragon with rybka on like 16 cores or something, just kind of think he would of come across it. maybe I'm wrong. maybe unicorns exist. who knows. 

 And you would think he would know about a certain move(or maybe he did but ignored it) in the french that refutes his ideas in one of his books...So you are saying because in one video it isn't mentioned that it doesn't work...Well, thats great. 

Look at the game.  You don't see compensation?  all my pieces are more active...His passed pawn isn't going anywhere.  Like I said I don't care if you believe in unicorns...See how that works both ways.  You proved absolutely nothing.  Maybe try and analyze(instead of blindly following GM (non) analysis) and then maybe we can both learn something. 

Pretty standard way of playing against when they try to keep the pawn.  I think black has compensation.

9...e5 (because of the f2 attack) looks good.

10...Nxd4 looks not good to me but I don't know what else to suggest :p

The reason it doesn't look good is because 13.Be2 and it seems white is just up a pawn with no problems.

I think white shouldn't be afraid of the check after 16.dxe5.  I don't think it's best, but in this case I think white overestimated it and instead gets himself into trouble with less than good moves like 18.Kh1 which is just a waste.

17...Nh5 is better than it seems at first... at least because it's sort of a trap as happened in the game.  But if white just plays quietly 18.Qd2 I don't see the problem for his position.

26.g3 seems wrong, but white doesn't look so dead until he loses the knight.

geez. yeah whatever. you go ahead and play your pawn sac thingie. hope it works well and you end up revolutionizing the sicilian. I'm not going to argue specific variations on this thing, I'm sure analysis would prove it unsound.

GM Dzindi's ideas for the french are solid. and yes I will happily blindly follow what a GM who analyzes an opening for weeks using rybka on 16 cores has to say.

trying to diss Dzindzi! oh zam no you didnt!

 But, the thing is you aren't blindly following what he said.  You are blindly following what he didn't say...And it wasn't I, but a john donaldson who "dissed" his analysis.  I question everything I read and learn.  You can blindly follow and learn nothing if you like

 Ugg...did I mention I am rusty?  I obviously saw the f2 attack later(idea behind n-c6)Think I saw it earlier but forgot about it for some reason...

Agreed white isn't dead after the check on e3.  But, black definitely isn't worst either..

After 18 q-d2 does seem best....

Thanks for the ideas

Now that I look at it again I saw that e5 move.  But, I think I misassessed the final position.  Don't remember exactly how I assessed it.  But I didn't assess it as good as I think it is(slight advantage to black after f3 nxc3 etc...)

16.dxe5 is just my impulsive "prove it to me" hehe.  I'm sure there are lots of better moves... but if he had to do it it wouldn't be a catastrophe or anything.

I thought you played well, if you're that rusty then you're way better than me :)

 Ty, although keep in mind after ne4 I might be worst if he simply takes the h7 pawn.  Thats the type of stuff I would never miss when I am on top of my game

Oh, heh :)  I stopped looking at the game after you won the knight.

Am I miscalculating something?  Doesn't 39.Rf1 win for white? 

 Bah....he queens with check.  Still missed that even after going over it again.

Amazing how you can keep seeing new things every time you replay even a game of your own.  That is one of the reasons I like chess.

well yes. when it comes down to it is a shortcut of sorts. just taking GM Dzindzi's word for things and not going through it all myself. I trust him though. he's a professional, has a supercomputer etc. I would like to know what line in the french of his was questioned by this john donaldson character if you know it off hand, just to see if it was a misunderstanding and/or if it has been revised as a result. it is false that you would "learn nothing" if you play opening lines he suggests without coming up with something yourself. if you play his opening lines, you get a rock solid position, survive the opening, and if your opponent errs you immediately know how to take advantage of it, and oh yeah, you learn a ton about chess in the ensueing middle and end games. don't believe me? yous don't knock it until you try it foo lol. viva la Dzindzi!

For accelerated dragon, may I also recommend games by Donaldson or Seirawan?

http://www.chess.co.uk/twic/jwatsonbkrev77.html

should have read john watson-who btw is one of the respected french experts and also still writes there articles for chesspublishing(opening theory site).

Can you learn something through your shortcut? Of course....is it the most efficient though? I don't think even dzindzi would say so. The only real way to learn something is to strain yourself and in this case try and find the best moves for both sides. Not only does his work occasionally not have the best moves. But, sometimes they seem to ignore it and I think that is a disservice.

I must say that I do have both books. They did help me build a quick rep. But, I also did some work of my own trying to find the critical lines which were ignored. Then I did some work on my own and learned more than I ever would have if I just read the book and took it at face value. Some of it I kept and other stuff I got rid of. That is what a good player should always do.