Refuting the Dragon

15...Bxf6 is the right move in that line (Topalov variation).

Just the title is sad

Just because someone playing the dragon lost doesn't means it's refuted.

Maybe not refuted per se but why play the dragon when the Najdorf and Paulsen are superior?  

I know nothing about that theorem thingy but have it on good authority that the lost dutchman mine is in the FL Everglades .  

Exactly!

And your definition of superiority is... ?

Popularity and superiority are two different things. Don't confuse them.

In the Paulsen it seems much harder for black to go wrong than in the Dragon.  There's a reason why Chess Stars made the Paulsen the subject of the Safest Sicilian.  The e6 pawn also covers d5 nicely and prepares a ...d5 thrust.  Even in bind positions can be prepared.  The Najdorf is superior because in the dragon black's d5 square is too weak while ...e6 in the dragon is oftentimes not viable due to weakening d6 too much.  

In short black has fewer strategic problems in the Najdorf and Paulsen while white has a harder time against them while white has a relatively simple attackng plan of pry open the h-file and sac, sac mate against the dragon.  

There's some good stuff with the Paulsen.  One can set up a Hedgehog formation, capture away from the center in some cases (dxc6!) to contest a completely open d-file, play waiting moves and allow white to loosen himself, and has good transposition potential too.  

Agreed that 2...e6 isn't nearly as popular as it logically should be, probably due to Fischer and Kasparov's great successes with the Najdorf overshadowing it, though Kasparov still has some Paulsen games.  

the dragon has no refutation and if it has you won't find it because even magnus Carlsen gas used it with success against very strong players. computers might find.something in a hundred years, but right now there is.no refutation it's a perfectly playable opening

It has no refutation but black seems to be putting all his eggs in one basket (the c-file) and other options seem safer, more flexible, and with more options.  On the long diagonal the bishop doesn't cover the d6 square and e7 can become backwards and weak if white times a Marco Hop correctly.  

Fermat's Last Theorem was proven before I was even born...

From one fellow Dragon player/fanatic to another...  You are proving his point as both of those "impossible" examples have been done.  So stop.  The Dragon is my life.  In a nutshell, I would smoke it if I could...

6

I am a Dragon player and I'd only like it if it would be labeled ''unsound'' because then most White players probably won't be as prepared anymore. I, surprisingly, don't agree about it being unsound. White's attack seems easy to play, but Black often makes use of very thematic moves. The amount of theory required is way less than for example the KID. People who say that as soon as they got out of theory they soon collapsed are people who either just memorized the moves without focussing on the themes or people who weren't ready for the Dragon yet.
Also, the lines on the verge of refutation are mostly lines involving Rxc3. That's not the only way for Black to play. 

Petrosianpupil that exact position won't occur. Nobody plays 9... Bd7 in response to 9... g4

Then he's not a worthy Dragon opponent