|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Apr-02-04 | | ruylopez900: <Sicilian Dragon> As Black I would definitely seek out the Dragon and hope for the Yugoslav Attack. It gives nice chances for a Queen side attack and, as mentioned already, Black gets a powerful fianchetto-ed Bishop. You are right though, as White I may prefer the Classical Defence (or Attack? Be2 instead of Be3) depending on the situation. |
|
| Apr-08-04 | | SicilianDragon: You misunderstand me. Honestly, unless you think you are a horrible tactician (in which case why would you play 1. e4?) then it doesn't make sense to play anything but the Yugoslav Attack against the Dragon. The Classical really doesn't offer White too many attacking chances. What I meant was that a Grandmaster may not want to play the Dragon because he would constantly have to face the ultra-sharp Yugoslav Attack. Without a doubt, the Yugoslav Attack is much more dangerous for black than it is for white. The Classical Variation (certainly not attack) is a quieter way of facing the Dragon and although it is less risky, it doesn't as directly seek to exploit the weaknesses (if there are any) in black's position. |
|
| Aug-24-04 | | Tunega Frantisek: Interes 1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5Qxd5 4.d4cxd4 5.cxd4Nc6 6.Nf3Bg4?? 7.Nc3! Bxf3? 8.gxf3Qxd4 9.Qxd4 Nxd4 10.Nb5!! Nc2+ 11.Kd1 Nxa1 12.Nc7+Kd8 13.Bh3!!(h3-c8!! Bc1-f4-Na8-c7,Kd1-d2 Rh1-a1!!) Tunega CZ |
|
| Aug-24-04 | | BiLL RobeRTiE: the heck? |
|
| Aug-24-04 | | OneArmedScissor: I just played the Dragon Sicilian in 3 games on chessanytime.com and won all 3! Gotta love the exchange sacrafice on c3 =] |
|
| Aug-24-04 | | iron maiden: <OneArmedScissor>, what's your handle on chessanytime? |
|
| Aug-24-04 | | OneArmedScissor: <Iron Maiden>
OneArmedScissor is my handle on both chessanytime.com and chessgames.comI'm playing some guy from my college on here though... he really sucks...
I've beat him 10 times in a row with the Scholar's Mate. |
|
| Aug-25-04 | | Lawrence: Maybe he's trying to set a new record. |
|
| Aug-25-04 | | OneArmedScissor: Is anyone interested in playing a few Dragon/Yugoslav Attack games on www.chessanytime.com? OneArmedScissor is my username on there... I've been playing crappy lately though :-\ |
|
| Jul-12-05 | | farrooj: This is such a difficlt opening, the percentage of white wins is very high. Does this mean that it's refuted? |
|
| Jul-12-05 | | aw1988: Not at all, but white does get many- well, almost lethal judging by their strength; attacks, but black can defend and get a good game if white isn't careful. Not refuted, but extremely difficult to defend; one simply must know the theory. |
|
| Jul-12-05 | | CGreene: If you like the black side of this, I highly recommend examining Larsen's variation of the Philidor (1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 ed 4. Nd4 g6) which can lead to similar positions, just as sharp (many times, sharper) and with a lot less theory. You can pretty much be sure that the only white players that play mainline Yugoslav...KNOW mainline Yugoslav...so it comes just a battle of which player knows the latest theory. Not so with Larsen's variation, since for many it will be their first time there. Lastly, I would add that so white many players AVOID mainline Dragons, just so they don't have to be concerned with latest improvements. So for the Dragon specialist, it can be frustrating because he could spend 80% of his time studying the Yugoslav Attack, but only get to play it 10% of the time. Larsen has several games on here, so you can see it in action. The other nice thing is most of the recent Philidor revival is not on the Larsen variation, but rather the Modern Hanham (...Be7) |
|
| Feb-03-06 | | vyskol: I had one of my best games ever with this opening on ChessWorld.net recently. I wonder if any of you better or more familiar players would care to offer a comment or criticism or two. (I played black) 1. e4 c5 2. Ng1f3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nf3xd4 Ng8f6 5. Nb1c3 g6 6. Bc1e3 Bf8g7 7. f3 O-O 8. Qd1d2 Nb8c6 9. Bf1c4 Bc8d7 10. h4 Ra8c8 11. Bc4b3 h5 12. O-O-O Nc6e5 13. Rd1g1 Rc8c5 14. Be3h6 b5 15. g4 a5 16. Nc3d5 hxg4 17. Nd5xf6 exf6 18. Bh6xg7 Kg8xg7 19. f4 Ne5c4 20. Bb3xc4 Rc5xc4 21. f5 Qd8b6 22. fxg6 Rc4xd4 23. Qd2f4 fxg6 24. Rg1xg4 Bd7xg4 25. Qf4xg4 Rd4c4 26. h5 Qb6e3 27. Kc1b1 Qe3xe4 (White resigned) 0-1 Thanks in advance. (Or apologies if you're bothered by my post. :)) |
|
| Feb-03-06 | | Kelvieto: <vyskol> White had a stronger attack, typical of the dragon, but white gave up his knight and later went down a whole rook in a dubious pursuit of the King. Overall you played a pretty decent game, but after move 17. white should win or at the least draw. 14...b5? better was 14...bxh6 15.Qxh6 Qa5=
17...exf6? better is 17.bxf6 18.bxf8 Qxf8 19 fxg4 a4 black is better. Perhaps 21. h5!? Qb6 22. Rd1 is what should have been played as white is better 22.fxg6?? is losing the Knight and the game (22.Rd1 Re8 23.b3 Rxd4 24.Qxd4 Qxd4 Rxd4=), after this error, the game was basically over. |
|
| Feb-03-06 | | Kelvieto: Dragon is a opening that has been shown to give white an advantage. Since players below 1900 have little knowledge of theory or do no know the purposes of moves. Then black is usually ok if not better, but after about 2000. I suggest that you switch to a different sicilian. Perhaps Najdorf or Sveshnikov. |
|
| Feb-03-06 | | RookFile: Tell this to Kasparov:
Anand vs Kasparov, 1995 |
|
| Feb-03-06 | | Kelvieto: There are many games I could name in which white scores a spectacular win over the dragon, but i have no prejudices with the dragon. I play it quite often. I just think that black must invest too much time to develop defences to moves that white can find at the board |
|
| Aug-23-06 | | Stevens: For anyone who plays against or with the Dragon regularly, here is a great video with instruction on this opening, which follows the Fischer-Larsen game http://video.google.com/videoplay?d... Fischer vs Larsen, 1958 |
|
| Nov-30-06 | | ganstaman: About not castling: the other day I played the white side of the Dragon. I may be messing up the move order, but it went something like this. 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 g6 6. Be3 Bg7 7. f3 O-O 8. Qd2 Bd7 9. Bc4 Qc7 10. Bb3 Nc6 11. h4 Ne5
click for larger view12. h5 Nxh5 13. Rxh5 gxh5 14. Bh6 Bf6 15. Bxf8 Rxf8 16. Nd5 and 17. Nxf6 exf6 First, I'll explain some of those moves, or add questions/comments. I question 12...Nxh5, as that allows me to open the kingside with the exchange sac. I've seen the move before, but I don't like it. 14...Bf6 was played because he didn't want me to get my queen in there as would have happened if the bishops exchanged on h6 or g7. I do like 16. Nd5, as it forks the black queen and dragon bishop and messes up black's kingside pawn structure some more. Now, what I was really wondering about was white (me) not castling for a long while. I figured I could always castle later, but why waste time in this foot race castling now? Plus, by not castling right away, black's queenside attack doesn't really threaten enough. And he has to wonder if he's attacking the right side of the board. In fact, in this game, black tried to fight on the kingside, which prompted my 0-0-0. Black was then left with his pieces defending instead of attacking. But I can't recall seeing this plan very much. Is there some way black can take advantage of white's centralized king? Or is it just that white won't have a strong enough attack unless he does castle queenside eventually, so there's really no reason to delay it? |
|
| Nov-30-06 | | Maatalkko: <ganstaman> I recently played a game in a 15 min. tournament where similar thoughts occurred to me. However, I knew this was a major breach of accepted theory so i wimped out with 0-0-0 at move 14. Can any strong players here explain why not castling is a bad idea? |
|
| Nov-30-06 | | Eyal: <ganstaman> I went over your game (with the help of Fritz), and actually one important variation shows why it can be dangerous for white to leave his king in the center. Your opponent's 14...Bf6? was a panic move. Black can calmly play here Ng6, Qc5, e6, or even Bxh6. However, 15.Bxf8? is also a mistake, because after Rxf8 16. Nd5 it allows black to interpose 16...Bh4+ (there you have it!). Instead, you should have played 15.Nd5!, and then 15...Bh4+ doesn't work, because after 16.g3 Bxg3+ 17.Kf1 Qd8 18.Bxf8 Qxf8 19.Qg5+ the queen picks up the bishop on g3. 17...Qc5 (attacking the knight on d4) doesn't work here, because of 18.Qg5+ Ng6 19.Nxe7+ Kh8 20.Qf6#. However, when there's no longer a bishop on h6 (as in the game), there's no mate threat on g7 in the last variation, and after Qg5+ black can play Kh8. On more general principles, queenside castling is of course not just a "waste of time" in this variation from the attacking point of view, since it allows the queen rook to join the attack. |
|
| Nov-30-06 | | ganstaman: Thanks. I would like to point out just in case it isn't clear that I did not give the complete game here. It went on for quite some time, but I just can't remember all the moves, at least not without a board (maybe I should test that out). I like <Eyal>'s analysis as it makes me feel better about myself, almost. I really didn't like ...Bf6, and in fact, after playing 16. Nd5, I started to wonder if 15. Nd5 would have been better. However, I thought this for all the wrong reasons, and didn't see at all ...Bh4+. 0-0-0 does get another rook to the center and kingside, so my plan was actually to delay castling for as long as possible until either 1) My king needed a place to run, or 2) I could use that rook to help fight. I was just trying to avoid giving black a real unmoving target until I needed to. Though I guess if black keeps up with his queenside attack, an eventual 0-0-0 would either transpose or be suicide (and if it is suicide, then my king is stuck in the center and I'm fighting on the kingside with 1 less rook than normal). At the least, it should be enough to confuse some of us lower rated players, unless there are many other issues with the king on e1 that we haven't yet explored. |
|
| Dec-01-06 | | Maatalkko: If you delay 0-0-0 for too long you might not have time to follow it up with Kb1. |
|
| Dec-01-06 | | Eyal: <ganstaman> I don't think you're missing anything "mysterious" about leaving the king on e1. You put it well: if you delay queenside castling, you risk either castling into an already well-developed attack, or getting stuck with your king in the center (which is what happened to Anand in his game with Kasparov, mentioned earlier on this page). It's all a delicate question of timing. In the main lines of the Yugoslav Attack white castles on moves 9-10, but it can be delayed for some more moves. See, for example, N Castaneda vs I Sipos, 2001, where white castles on the 16th move and it seems to be exactly the right moment. |
|
| Mar-19-07 | | LazyNinja: Hey guys. Anybody here play on Chess Live or FICS? I play as NimzoCapa on both (mostly Chess Live now, but also some on FICS in response to specific challenges). Anyway, I play both sides of the Yugoslav Attack and know a lot of the theory pretty deep and would love to get in some good practice games. I'm rated at about 1900 USCF (hopefully a bit stronger in my favorite opening). |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
