I tried it a few times and thought it is inherently passive. Obviously I hadn't studied it much. It was just my instinct. Which I think was correct!
If I play the najdorf, I will get crushed. That doesn’t mean that the najdorf is bad.
I just love it how 1400s know openings better than grandmasters.
I love when people think online ratings reflect anything 
If the Yugoslav refuted the dragon, then there wouldn’t be grandmasters playing it.
I also love when someone leaves out a key word (and then an entire sentence) to make a strawman argument.
Magnus carlsen played the dragon when he was 2700! Gawain Jones got a winning position against magnus carlsen in the dragon!
Magnus also plays the "Norwegian Rat", so are you going to start advocating for that? It is not his main weapon for a reason. As I stated before, the margin of error for Black against the Yugoslav Attack is razor thin. White's margin of error is much wider. And while Gawain plays it quite often, he has a -1 score in the Dragon overall (with a bunch of draws) and a -1 score in the Yugoslav Attack (where his lone win was against Judit Polgar in a rapid event almost 10 years after she retired!) There is a reason it is not often seen at the top levels, and that reason is the Yugoslav Attack.
Honestly I would like to know when you play a6 what position are you looking to play against the c3 sicilian? Is it 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 a6 3. c3 d5 4. exd Qxd 5. d4 e6 Anything besides e6 looks to give white a comfortable advantage by simply taking the c pawn and going into the ending a pawn up. And even after e6 white looks better after 6. Be3. Or maybe it as some other position you had in mind?
I don't play this way, but if I were forced to play Black, I would force White into an IQP where his development edge is not enough to allow for an attack, and his endgame prospects are less than appealing if he doesn't liquidate the isolated pawn quickly.
I wonder if white really has to go into the IQp position though. I think I might try 6. Be3 and just continue developing my pieces until I really do have to take on d4.
Obviously it's interesting to me because I've played it for 25 years.
Can I tell you something? Objectivity isn't something that really exists so much as an ATTEMPT to bring in all the factors in a situation and to assess them fully, properly and intelligently. Obviously you're not doing that because you're criticising the variations I've worked out without knowing what they are.
End of conversation, perhaps?|
Criticizing the variations? Where did you get that? Unless you are referring to my statement that there is a lack of independent value since you either transpose into another mainline or go into an inferior sideline? I've also analyzed the O'Kelly as I have to play against it as White quite often. I'm sure you can find ways to make it "unique", but you will be hard pressed to get anything better than you would in the mainlines (after all, they are the main lines for a reason).
That aside, your claim earlier was that you were "trying to be objective", and now you are saying that "objectivity doesn't exist"? So, you are just spouting philosophical nonsense? To say you are trying to be objective means you are trying to remove your ego from the equation. I would buy that, except that your entire rationale following it is that your ego thinks this way. In short, you are not being objective at all, and should have just stated that in your opinion (subjective) the O'Kelly is interesting. No disagreement there. You like it, great!
You said that the Yugoslav practically refutes the dragon, I never have any problems with the Yugoslav.
No, I said (and I quote):
It is not so much passive as it is just difficult to play. The Yugoslav Attack almost refutes the Dragon (it is still a draw with best play, but the margin of error for Black is razor thin!). To quote Fischer: "h4, h5, sac, sac, mate" (emphasis added)
And you "never have any problems with the Yugoslav"? Really? See, the funny thing about closing your old accounts ... those games still exist:
White seems to be doing quite well against you with the Yugoslav ...
I wonder if white really has to go into the IQp position though. I think I might try 6. Be3 and just continue developing my pieces until I really do have to take on d4.
He doesn't have to, but it is his best option. Something like Be3 would allow Black to play Bf5, Nf6, e6 in a game that would resemble a French Defense where Black has already liquidated White's central pawns and doesn't have a bad bishop (i.e. a very good French!) Alternatively, White could take the d4-pawn with the knight after Be3, which would encourage Black to play e5. The game is somewhat balanced, but Black is running out of problems to solve as his pieces continue to get developed to active posts. It certainly is playable for both sides.
You said that the Yugoslav practically refutes the dragon, I never have any problems with the Yugoslav.
No, I said (and I quote):
It is not so much passive as it is just difficult to play. The Yugoslav Attack almost refutes the Dragon (it is still a draw with best play, but the margin of error for Black is razor thin!). To quote Fischer: "h4, h5, sac, sac, mate" (emphasis added)
And you "never have any problems with the Yugoslav"? Really? See, the funny thing about closing your old accounts ... those games still exist:
White seems to be doing quite well against you with the Yugoslav ...
Lmao, I have been playing the dragon since I was 900. Of course my win percentage is going to be low, when I started playing the dragon I was scoring terribly. In fact, on lichess, my win rate with the dragon is 45%.
I wonder if white really has to go into the IQp position though. I think I might try 6. Be3 and just continue developing my pieces until I really do have to take on d4.
He doesn't have to, but it is his best option. Something like Be3 would allow Black to play Bf5, Nf6, e6 in a game that would resemble a French Defense where Black has already liquidated White's central pawns and doesn't have a bad bishop (i.e. a very good French!) Alternatively, White could take the d4-pawn with the knight after Be3, which would encourage Black to play e5. The game is somewhat balanced, but Black is running out of problems to solve as his pieces continue to get developed to active posts. It certainly is playable for both sides.
I think I would prefer white after. 6. Be3 Bf5 7. cxd e6 8. Nc3 Bb4 9. Be2 Nf6 10. 0-0 where the position looks like a chigorins queens gambit where black has played a6 instead of Nc6.
Lmao, I have been playing the dragon since I was 900. Of course my win percentage is going to be low, when I started playing the dragon I was scoring terribly. In fact, on lichess, my win rate with the dragon is 45%.
So, you are claiming you were rated 900 in Jan 2019? And by December 2019 you were 1500? And by April 2020 you were almost 2000? Do you really want to go with that? That account was about a year old, you played over 100 games against the Yugoslav in that time period, and your score against it was, to put it mildly, bad. Your LiChess account is only a week old.
I think I would prefer white after. 6. Be3 Bf5 7. cxd e6 8. Nc3 Bb4 9. Be2 Nf6 10. 0-0 where the position looks like a chigorins queens gambit where black has played a6 instead of Nc6.
7. cxd4 would give you the IQP. At that point, Black would simply start trading off minor pieces (7..Bxb1 for example).
Well that would give white the bishop pair and there are still a lot of pieces left. But we really should back this up. In the example you gave white got an excellent version of an isolated queen pawn being able to liquidate the pawn and get very active pieces....which lead to a clearly won endgame. In other words there is no reason for white to play 6. Be3. Actually I feel like no matter what black does white should have an advantage. Im just not seeing how a6 is a very useful move in these kind of positions. At some point black is going to have to exchange on d4 and when that happens Nc3 is coming and the queen will either have to move or Bb4 will have to be played....which is basically a chigorin where black is behind in development because a6 was played and not Nc6.
Well that would give white the bishop pair and there are still a lot of pieces left. But we really should back this up. In the example you gave white got an excellent version of an isolated queen pawn being able to liquidate the pawn and get very active pieces....which lead to a clearly won endgame. In other words there is no reason for white to play 6. Be3. Actually I feel like no matter what black does white should be close to winning. Im just not seeing how a6 is a very useful move in these kind of positions. At some point black is going to have to exchange on d4 and when that happens Nc3 is coming and the queen will either have to move or Bb4 will have to be played....which is basically a chigorin where black is behind in development because a6 was played and not Nc6.
Do not get confused by being temporarily up 2 pawns when both sides have a pair of bishops and rooks. Those a- and b- pawns will be difficult to advance, so while White is definitely better, he has a lot to do before he can get to a winning position (granted, if somehow all the pieces were traded off, that is a completely winning endgame). However, that also centers on White recognizing he needs to push d5 before getting completely developed. Objectively, that is easy to see; at the board, that is a very committal decision. If you are correct, you get a decent game. If you are wrong, you may end up simply lost. If you are going to play the Alapin or Delayed Alapin against the Sicilian, you will want to get comfortable with IQP positions, as they come up quite often in those variations.
Also note that the bishop pair is only an advantage if you can use it. At that point in the game, you have a lot of work to do in order to make it stand out - but your first problem is dealing with the fact that Black will try to control d5 and blockade your pawn (and he's already traded off 1 piece that could help you defend it).
Personally, I've always viewed the O'Kelly as an okay sideline, but since Black has so many other very good options (Najdorf, Taimanov, Classical), it is not necessary to try to confuse White.
Ahahaha.... post #107 is really brilliant!
Also Magnus's results with the dragon are embarrassing. Draws and losses all the time against players a lot lower rated than him.
The dragon is anything but passive, it's very, very sharp. It might work at the lower levels, but claiming to "have never had any trouble with the yugoslav attack" is ridiculous.
Okay thanks for analyzing with me.....Ive think Ive thought enough about the c3 sicilian vs a6 siclian.
I do play OTB usually U1800. Its okay if you are right and it is easy for white to get an advantage if my opponents really know their stuff. I doubt all of them will....whats likely to happen is that I will win some and lose some. Also...Im not planning to play the dragon forever. There are a lot of sicilian variations to explore.....so I'll probably play the dragon for a while and then switch to something else just to experience more of what the sicilian defence has to offer.
Let me show you a fairly random Sicilian game using the system I invented, which starts with 2. ... a6. This is going back to February, pre-Covid, when I was still playing reasonably well. I'm just so happy playing black if it's a Sicilian. It doesn't matter what white does. I've tried playing the Dragon and I'm sticking to my guns that it's very passive compared with this system which gives so many sharp positions.
Nice piece sac. Now, the question is did you calculate it, or did you simply recover? 
the one where your opponent loses
Taimanov and Kan for variation
Here is a game where I destroyed the Yugoslav:
Great! Now do it against Karpov or Kasparov in a non-blitz game :-P
If your opponent plays poorly, it doesn't matter what you play. As I said, see the link I posted earlier.
You said that the Yugoslav practically refutes the dragon, I never have any problems with the Yugoslav.