Sicilian Najdorf Polugaevsky variation

What do you guys think of the Polugaevsky variation of the sicilian? 

I love to play it in online (turn based) chess, does anyone else have an opinion on it? 

pretty crazy, id be forever scared of piece sacs on b5 and rooks and queens coming down the d file for my king.

I find that once white's attack loses steam black gets a good endgame position or a attacking chances of their own. 

Take a look at the following clickable recent thread on chess.com:

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/game-showcase/a-mighty-triangulation

There's a facinating encounter in the Najdorf Polugaevsky variation that can be found here:

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1673497

Nadorf is my favourite opening as Black, but I never play this line, because I think it's too risky. With white, I encounter this line extremely rarely, because at my level ( elo 1750+-) not everybody is willing to play this, with the usual zero development, stranded king and strong central attack by white for no paricular reason other than the thrill of it. And the so called "Main Lines" are, above all else, downright ugly. Btw, if I remember correctly, a beautiful insight on these lines, and on the Sicilian in general, can be found in Polugaevsky's book "Grandmaster  Preparation", a great book.

Yes, its amazon too, I think I might get it. And I think that everybody encounters it rarely. However, I have to disagree with, one gets some dynamic chances, not just a thrill!

It remainds me of Danny King's quote about the Poluagaevsky variation in "Winning with the Najdorf(1993, I think.)"......"too risky. Even the man (Polugaevsky) himself isn't playing it these days!" Personally, I tried to play this as Black in standard time control a few times, and...the results weren't pretty! So maybe my opinions are somewhat biased...(mind you, I don't do too badly in the main lines after any of White's sixth moves, for my level at least.) This may also have to do with the fact that the biggest problem in the Najdorf for a beginner is to overcome Black's lagging development, and I always try to solve it by mobilize my army as fast as possible (The Fischer-Browne Mainline, 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Qb6 8.Qd2 Nc6, 6.Be3 e5, 6.Be2 e5....etc). The Polugaevasky approach is the exact opposite of that.

Interesting quotes: " White immediately casts doubts on opponent's queenside activity and strikes a blow in the centre, exploiting the pin on the knight at f6" - Polugaevsky, on 8.e5.

"The  ultra-audacious  'Polugayevsky  Varia­
tion',  devised  in  the  late  1950s,  is  much
sharper  than 7...Be7, 7...Nbd7, 7...Qc7, or even 7...Qb6.  Now the value of each move is
very high  and it is not easy for White  to  find
his way in  the resulting  complications." - Garry Kasparov (on 7...b5!?), On My Great Predecessors, Volume 3, p96.

I think the resulting complications and the bishop pair give black decent chances in this opening, thus I will continue to keep it in my repetoire. 

Kasparov has discussed it at great length in his second volume of Learn Najdorf dvd. But his overall message seemed to be " to be tried at your own risk. Worth studying anyway. (though, not worth playing) "

Played it for years, eventually gave it up, although results were not too bad because many people don't study 6. Bg5 in details and will play the standard plan with Qf3 and Bd3 or g4 against anything. 10. exf6 Qe5+ 11. Be2 Qxg5 12. 0-0 is critical and Black's position is just ugly as sin. Polugaevsky's 12... Qe5 is extremely dubious if not fully bad, so the only way to go is to enter the dodgy mess of 12... Ra7 13. Qd3. Overall, rather than waste hours of computer analysis or tons of energy at the board trying to save this, it's just more reasonable to put this effort into healthier positions.

I have played the Polugaevsky twice in rated USCF events, and crushed White both times. The players of White were rated 2000+ USCF. Polugaevsky is very strong against unprepared amateurs.

I would refrain from posting antique games in a Sicilian line. 10.exf6 in that Tal game is known to be advantegeous for White.

Yes...but thats exactly why white doesnt mind seeing it for a blitz game.

The Najadorf is a stogy codger defense these days...you fend off a blistering attack, and maybe get a win. Good defense for Anand style, and people who like obsess that all gambits must be accepted because they are an injustice.

Ivanchuk recently said that computers have refuted the Polugaevsky variation. Ask Pfren or other ICCF masters to see whether anyone bothers to defend it anymore. I don't think elite GMs have played it in a serious competition in years.

The game is discussed (via one game) in my "Play the Najdorf Sicilian" (James Rizzitan).  It looked interesting but not too promising because the pawn at f6 just seems like a thorn that is difficult to remove. Perhaps a surprise weapon?

 Here's a recent Black win with it:

Hmm... a game between Kantans (who?) and Xiong, played on the internet in rapid time controls is your proof that it's being played by elite GMs in games that matter?

Ok.