Bronstein's Mainline Queen Sac?!

I was recently looking at some of the lines Black has against the Saemisch, wondering if I should play 6...c5 or 6...e5 when I red about the infamous Bronstein's queen sac line that has been esayed 159 times in games of players 2200+ and thought it was a very interesting line I may even try.

The problem is that statistics are scary, Qf2 gives great results for White (50% while Black only has 25% which can be found in any other opening)

The line is this one:

Bump? Here is a game with it:

Bronstein's dreams were crushed in this game:

Can someone bump this?
Pfren, poucin? Yisus craist?

I couldnt find a single game with this variation on the ICCF which tells me it is busted?

Can someone prove with analysis the refutation?

Did you look at 12...Bh6, the move that White Q's retreat from h4 makes possible?  You're right, very few games in this line, can't draw any conclusions

Haven't looked at it, but can'w white simply play b3 and solidify his position? Or am I missing something basic?

The game I posted went 13.h4 first and then 14.b3.  Black played ..Na6 and was ultimately able to bring this N to d4.  I'd suggest trying to find a way to prevent this from happening?!  b3 saves White's pawn on c4 but doesn't do anything else to 'solidify' White's position.

You are right, I thought that at first White could play 13.b3 Na6 14.a3 but after Nc5 White has just horribly weakened his position.

Probably 13.Qe2 Na6 14.Nd1 should get the job done.

13.Qe2 Na6 14.Nd1 succeeds in exchanging a piece but is hardly getting any job done, as Black just takes on d1 followed by ...f5.  White is quite undeveloped and all three of Black's minor pieces are strong.

Seems promising tho give me some time to backup my initial variations with analysis, I need to study the dragon to try and beat my bullet coach before analyzing in deep this interesting line.

A little update. (I am still working on the h4-h5 plan but I think I analyzed my Qe2 deep enough to give some conclusions).

13.Qe2 is way inferior from the mate on the kingside plan, Black gets some activity and White needs to be extremely careful to convert into a slightly promising endgame which I posted here:

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/endgames/help-kid-theory-by-analyzing-this-endgame

Perhaps I will continue researching, covering more moves in those lines.

Dear GreenCastleBlock, here is my analysis on the inferior Qe2, h4 certainly offers some good chances for White but I havent found anything conclusive and I need to sleep, so maybe tomorrow I will post my conclusions.

 Hi all.  At my rating, it is difficult to understand this line in the move 7...Nh5.  In the next moves black ends up sacrificing his queen.  I don't see the point of this sacrifice. Why not, for example 7... Nd7?  Thanks in advance, for your explanations.

Yes, it is a rum line to get involved with when learning the KingsIndian. If black wants to play normally, 7...Nh5 is ok, and generally more active than Nd7, and can follow up with f5.  Kasparov usually prefered 7...c6. In the Bronstein line itself Kasparov seems to think 12Ke2 Nc4 13Rc1 c6 with unclear play was the most critical. I can't say I know what is going on there either.

From a strategical point of view allowing the bishop to reinforce Black's dark squares dominance does not look like a good idea.

Nh5 is simply more active, in fact, if allowed Black would preffer playing Nh5 instead of Nd7 (as you can see it in the Samisch and Bayonnet attack lines), appart from playing f5 the knight may be able to go to h4 where Bxf4-exf4 would open Black's bishop.

Lol, the history repeats itself, in most games in this position white was higher rated.

Thanks for your input, I agree with you, White should be better and perhaps the line is busted on correspondence chess, but OTB it is not so easy. Do you remember what Black played? 

Do you remember where did you read that ab out Kasparov?

It is in his notes to game 23 of 1990 WC match with Karpov in "On Modern Chess part 4".