Roman DziDzipaisfgpikjb is a retard
Playing Against The Accelerated Dragon
Sort:
Dec 29, 2010
0
#3
His "Dragon refutation" as published on chess.com's videos... was actually very good. And I've been able to use bits and pieces. There are still huge holes of course...
his advocacy of the accelerated dragon is annoying though. White must get SOMETHING SOMEWHERE! Otherwise it would be seen non-stop in pro chess. Instead we see a ton of Berlin's where white gets to torture black for 90 moves before finally agreeing to the draw black wanted from move 1.
Maybe with best play the bind is just equal now a days, but it's really comfortable to play as white... I just go for the bind.
I used to play the classical dragon before for a very long time. I switched to accelerated dragon about 3 years ago. Comparing the two I can say that black is much safer in the accelerated dragon.
Playing the accelerated dragon against fritz, I am having difficulty in the early Qxd4 lines instead of the usual Nxd4. The Maroczy Bind is fine with black too if a win is nit so important.
I have a dedicated chess blog on the Sicilian Dragon. If you are interested, visit www.MyChessPet.com Suggest what related topics I should write as well.
Hope it helps.
Play sicillian closed against some dragon player and crush them with Grand Prix or something like that. Solves all your problems. You can still play normally against the lines that you like.
Dec 30, 2010
0
#7
Estragon wrote:
I don't play it or 1 e4, but my recent games database (2007 on) shows the main line with 5 Nc3 scoring pretty well (the side lines not so much, but they seem to be tried against higher-rated opponents, so it may be natural and not the opening).
So: 5 Nc3 Bg7 6 Be3 Nf6 7 Bc4 0-0 8 Bb3 seems the logical choice for anyone who doesn't want to try the Bind with 5 c4.
This is my conclusion too... Although by playing this way black avoids the 9. O-O-O lines of the 'real' dragon (which is part of my repertoire), the resulting positions after 8. ... d6 are still very much to my taste. White has good chances. HOWEVER... Roman Dzizi (as I'm aware) suggested 8. ... a5 and I'm yet to find a good way to deal with his annoying threats to equalize with a4/d5/Nxd4 tactics.
Dec 30, 2010
0
#8
Hey Conzipe! Great post... That's sorta what I'm looking for: A way to play against those three sidelines. I haven't found anything entirely satisfactory against Ng4 and a5.
I actually do play the Bind as my main weapon against the accelerated dragon. Against people who are not prepared specifically for me, this is fine. But in local tournaments where preparation is a little more important, I find myself struggling to equalize with the white pieces at times. On a barely related note, here's a kinda cool game I played over the summer with the Bind.
Edit - This game and a handful of other annotated games can be found in my blog.
Dec 30, 2010
0
#9
@Catalyst_Kh: Have you done any research into 8. ... a5 9. a4 ?
In my little brain full of supposedly 'logical' thoughts... our play is on the kingside, black's play is on the queenside... THEREFORE... if we can slow his play by making the B pawn backwards and fixing the queenside... MAYBE our play on the kingside will at least force black to defend instead of trying to snatch that extra tempo and essentially play white.
I can't find much material on 9. a4 though. Ideas?
Dec 30, 2010
0
#10
I'm going to look into 9. O-O as suggested in "dismantling the sicilian" ... apparently white has something there. I'll keep you posted. :P
ih8sens wrote:
His "Dragon refutation" as published on chess.com's videos... was actually very good. And I've been able to use bits and pieces. There are still huge holes of course...
his advocacy of the accelerated dragon is annoying though. White must get SOMETHING SOMEWHERE! Otherwise it would be seen non-stop in pro chess. Instead we see a ton of Berlin's where white gets to torture black for 90 moves before finally agreeing to the draw black wanted from move 1.
Is it impossible that chess is a deep enough game that it's possible for lesser GMs to know more about certain lines than higher tier GMs? Perhaps Dzindi had more faith in this line than the top GMs, and thus decided to take a closer look. The guys at the top are geniuses, but that doesn't mean they can evaluate entire openings effortlessly; I suppose they just don't get a good feeling about it, but that doesn't mean their opinion can't be wrong, especially if they didn't actually sit down and study it thoroughly.
So I'd say keep an open mind. After all, lines like the catalan has recently become very popular, and it's quite possible that they literally "just realized" the opening has more chances in there than they originally thought it did. Lines like the scotch for example were, at a time, considered by the best players of their time, not dangerous, yet all it took was for just one person to take a closer look at it (Kasparov) and, though I'm not sure what the eval. is now, black's equalizing path is not nearly as easy. Chess is complex enough that opportunities can be lurking around every corner, and sometimes they're not so obvious, even for top GMs, and demand a close look.
Indeed it does seem weird that so many top GMs are willing to defend the berlin. They prove it's resilient, but that's really the best they can find? Indeed that's by no means clear; they could just be very experienced with it as it has been used so much recently and, convenience wise, that certainly counts for something.
There is another forum on another website, where opening lines are discussed properly. On chess.com this is unlikely to happen.
My lord, I hate the accelerated Dragon!
Well, here's black's idea, for those who don't already know. SInce the 9. 0-0-0 d5?! lines are rather problematic for Black these days, Black plays the accelerated dragon in hopes that if d5 is necessary it might be played in only one move, saving him a tempo and possibly the game.
The way I see it, no Black player plays the Sicilian in hopes that he will get to play a long, positional, struggle. Especially not if he plays the dragon. If you aren't looking for a razor sharp game with insane sacrifices and mating attacks, where one tempo decides the victor, then the Dragon is not your opening!
On this note, I believe the Maroczy bind is absolutely the correct choice for White, not just from an objective point of view, but psychologically as well. You take Black into a situation he might not be comfortable with, and immediately restrict his counterplay.
Dec 30, 2010
0
#14
Fezzik wrote:
One of the secrets to the success of the Sicilian in general is that Black is often better in the endgame because in order to win, White has to make positional concessions.
It's a common misconception that Black ruins his position with 1...c5.
Lol, who is it that actually believes this ?
yes black has an extra center pawn that can be an advantage in the endgame
Fezzik wrote:
Atos, players who think that the reason the Sicilian is so great is cos of its great counterattacks. I've known novices who thought that by playing the Sicilian, they wouldn't have to know the endgame as well because the game rarely reaches the endgame!
Well, it depends on the variation. If it's the Classical Dragon you'd probably expect most games to be decided in the middlegame, one way or other.
I believe that the endings favor black in most sicilians and the middlegames tend to favor white. The longer the games go the more black wins but the short decisive games tend to favor white considerably. I believe this is the basic appeal of the sicilian(s) ...... its very double edged. For this reason I have never believed the sicilian to be a good choice for weaker players because A: they must be able to defend very well in very complex positions to survive to the ending where B : they must be strong enough in endgames to bring the full point home and weaker players are not usually good at either A nor B . I will define weaker as below A class for argument's sake.
I think the Dragon is the variation that I would recommend to a less experienced player who wants to play the Sicilian. Sharp, tactical play that teaches a lot about attacking and defending, and does not require deep positional understanding. Unfortunately, against stronger opponents a lot of memorization is needed, which is why I stopped playing it.
Reb wrote:
I believe that the endings favor black in most sicilians and the middlegames tend to favor white. The longer the games go the more black wins but the short decisive games tend to favor white considerably.
That's in general valid for Sicilian: White must prove his point by launching a strong attack, otherwise Black's superior central control will prove decisive. I have to add that I never play Sicilian (although as White I always open with e4). The reason is the large number of critical variations/sidelines one must know before playing it. This was the advice I received from a coach, a long time ago. That coach suggested that Sicilian is only appropiate when you well are above FM level. Up to that point - he added - both Black or White have enough resources to play for a win, while at the same time, avoiding the theory of the Sicilian.
Maybe there is no answer to this right now...
Or maybe only our super GM's know...
But anyways, at the top levels... the accelerated dragon isn't all that popular by any means. Yet, according to the always psychotic Roman Dzinziachvili (sp?), the Accelerated Dragon is black's path to equality (apparently with winning chances) against 1. e4.
Obviously Dzinzi can't be trusted completely... but with only his analysis ringing in my ears... I've been finding it hard to find a decent way to get any pull against this 'not so popular' opening.
I've been away from chess for about 3 months...
Anyone know of anything half decent against the Accelerated? Obviously the bind isn't quite good enough anymore... unless theory changed its mind again.
Thanks in advance!
Matt