its not. It is considered risky, mostly because black has to play very accurately while whites plan is very straightfoward.
Believe it or not it has a reputation of being extremely drawish and boring at upper level.
Why is the dragon considered dubious
Sort:
Ive read in multiple places that its forcing lines often simplify down to dead drawn endings.
its not considered dubious just risky
Dubious opening? Unless it violates opening principles any opening is viable below master level. Your going from the najdorf Sicilian to the Dragon? Whew you must have hours on end to study the mountain of theory that comes with those openings....not to mention all those anti-Sicilian lines you need to know as you might get a true Sicilian in a tournament game 1 out 3 games....too much theory....no thanks
uhohspaghettio wrote:
It's fine if you're a computer. If you're a human as the above poster said you have to play very accurately.
It doesn't have a reputation of being boring/drawish at the upper level, you must be thinking of the accelerated or hyperaccelerated dragon.
Actually, it is pretty drawish at the upper level. You often end up in imbalances that are often dynamic in a middlegame, but useless in an endgame, like maybe Rook (White) for Bishop and Pawn (Black).
Tradedowns are commonplace in the Dragon. Not the case for the Najdorf.
Noreaster wrote:
Dubious opening? Unless it violates opening principles any opening is viable below master level. Your going from the najdorf Sicilian to the Dragon? Whew you must have hours on end to study the mountain of theory that comes with those openings....not to mention all those anti-Sicilian lines you need to know as you might get a true Sicilian in a tournament game 1 out 3 games....too much theory....no thanks
If you have to use "below master level" to validate an opening, then it's dubious. At master level, the Dragon is NOT dubious, just DRAWISH! However, you can follow opening principals and an opening still be dubious. A few examples include:
1) The Milner-Barry Gambit (1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.Bd3) is extremely dubious, but White hasn't violated any "principles".
2) Latvian Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5) - This one is very contraversial. A correspondence player will say it's completely sound and that other people are nuts. Non-correspondence players will say it's the biggest piece of c**p that anybody can play, and is busted. I do play correspondence chess, and I have played it as Black, but even I don't think it's sound. Just my humble opinion. I think 3.Nxe5 is advantage White. All other moves Black has a way to equalize.
3) Scandinavian Gambit Accepted (1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.c4 c6 4.dxc6) - It's been known for a long time that accepting the gambit is extremely dicey for White and that White should transpose to a Panov-Botvinnik Attack with 4.d4 cxd5 5.Nc3
dragon is a double edge opening ,maybe at high level can be drawish because of GM 's memorizing openings unlike us ameteurs ,and if you are not working too deeply in dragon.you can lost because of opening itself is sharp unlike other quite openings dragon is sharp and at some points you have to to some key moves
pdve wrote:
Can anyone point out what is the problem with the dragon.
I am looking to add it to my repertoire as my main answer to 1.e4. I find the najdorf a bit difficult and white has many options against it. I find that in the dragon, black can determine the course of play and sacrifices are the norm.
+wait what?
"Drawish at upper level" is one of the most pointless things people can post in a forum. Most people here are not upper level players and therefore it is not necessarily drawish below this. And the dragon isn't at all drawish at lower levels.
The key is the Chinese Dragon. The Main Lines against 9.Bc4 are full of perpetuals and trade-downs. Also against 9.0-0-0 it seems everything is bad for Black except 9...d5! 10.ed Nxd5 11.Nxc6 bc 12.Bd4 Bxd4 13.Qxd4 Qb6 (or some similar line)
The dragon is not dubious. It is just a narrow opening in the sense that there are few critical variations, mostly in the yugoslav. As long as you know the main lines and ideas in that line, and you are not scared of an attack on your king, you'll be fine.
One of the problems that Black faces when playing the Dragon is that there are LOTS of plans for White, while Black has to remember ALL the right moves. One step aside, and you are likely to lose quickly and painfully. Only brave people with a lot of experience and understanding of the system can employ it successfully. I would say that this opening is good as a surprise weapon, but not as a main line. And yes, I have played more games in the Dragon than just about any other grandmaster (over 100 classical time control ones), so I know what I am talking about :)
It's dubious because Bobby Fisher slew the dragon more than 30 years ago!!!
Natalia_Pogonina wrote:
One of the problems that Black faces when playing the Dragon is that there are LOTS of plans for White, while Black has to remember ALL the right moves. One step aside, and you are likely to lose quickly and painfully. Only brave people with a lot of experience and understanding of the system can employ it successfully. I would say that this opening is good as a surprise weapon, but not as a main line. And yes, I have played more games in the Dragon than just about any other grandmaster (over 100 classical time control ones), so I know what I am talking about :)
pfren wrote:
Mrs. Pogonina is right of course. I want to point out that Black can avoid all those "only moves" of the Soltis/ Konstantinopolsky mainlines by employing the Accelerated Dragon. The only issue with this one is that if white employs the Maroczy, then you are likely to lose slowly and painfully...
Yeah, you bet your ass Ms. Pogonina is right!!! As if we needed confirmation from what... A MERE IM... haaahahahaha. You can now take your afternoon nap pfren, we don't need your raspy comments anymore now that a real GM is here.
Aren't IMs in general stronger than WGMs? (no offense Natalia 
)
Mainline_Novelty wrote:
pfren wrote:
pfren wrote:
Mrs. Pogonina is right of course. I want to point out that Black can avoid all those "only moves" of the Soltis/ Konstantinopolsky mainlines by employing the Accelerated Dragon. The only issue with this one is that if white employs the Maroczy, then you are likely to lose slowly and painfully...
Yeah, you bet your ass Ms. Pogonina is right!!! As if we needed confirmation from what... A MERE IM... haaahahahaha. You can now take your afternoon nap pfren, we don't need your raspy comments anymore now that a real GM is here.
Aren't IMs in general stronger than WGMs? (no offense Natalia )
Yes IM is in general better than WGM
uhohspaghettio wrote:
Pogonina has the full GM title however, not just the WGM title. She is one of the very few ladies to ever have done so.
I didn't know that...why doesn't she use it here then?
uhohspaghettio wrote:
Mainline_Novelty wrote:
uhohspaghettio wrote:
Pogonina has the full GM title however, not just the WGM title. She is one of the very few ladies to ever have done so.
I didn't know that...why doesn't she use it here then?
It seems you're right, but "grandmaster" and not "woman grandmaster" is written in several places.
Whatever the case her peak rating was above 2500, which is the general standard for GM status.
Fair enough. Anyone know pfren's peak rating?
Can anyone point out what is the problem with the dragon.
I am looking to add it to my repertoire as my main answer to 1.e4. I find the najdorf a bit difficult and white has many options against it. I find that in the dragon, black can determine the course of play and sacrifices are the norm.