If you play Bc4 yugoslav vs regular Dragon, enter the anti yugoslav lines would be praticall or else you have to learn two lines vs regular Dragon since there are players that play accelerated to avoid 9 0-0-0 but like to play vs 9 Bc4.

I'm going to revive this thread here, now a year later, rather than starting a new discussion.

I'm currently getting back to the White side and looking for the updated opinions on the lines discussed here. I used to play the Maroczy with great success a decade ago as a class B playing 9.Be3. Currently to my eye, the Gurgenidze looks like a pretty simple equalizing/drawing line for Black (and indeed, has been very easy for me playing some practice positions from the Black side). Primary opposition 1900-2300.

Should I just suck it up, create maximum complications in the Gurgenidze and congratulate my opponent for the effort if they're up to steadily holding the drawn ending?

I share bragesjo and BPaulsen's views on the 7.Nc2 setups.

Would entering the main lines of the Anti-Yugoslav with Nb3 be a better practical choice? Are the ...a5 lines a theoretical issue?

I can only add that for those who has never heard of Dzinzi he is well known to make analytical mistakes and overoptemistic evaluations on his promoted ideas, I have found several such things in the book I mentioned. So I one uses any Dzindzi analyse, be shure to double check them yourself!

From what I have seen mainly from Greet's book, both Be3 and Bg5 give a slight edge to White (maybe very slight as the situation is more or less as described by BPaulsen above). But the resulting endings may require some patient defence, hence my previous quote: "you will need good endgame skills to face the main line".

Well, this is mostly the case with many other setups for Black vs. the Bind (except maybe the ...f5-break tries). The main reason I suggested the Gurge as a starting point is mainly because it is easy to set up and remember.

Well, Chess Openings for Black Explained had some nice points, but it is Dzindzi work you know. I can't really believe it is better for Black either, more like a small edge for White.

About 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6 5.c4 Nf6  6.Nc3 d6 and allows 7.Nc2 I actually dont think that white has anything special in this line. Experts vs the Sicilian recommended Nc2 and called the most critical line, (a side note on a exchange sac that can not be accepted)  an edge for white while for example Chess Openings for black Explained called the position the opposete (an edge for black). I am not shure who is better since computers are very closed to 0.00 but every decent engine I tried has had extremly small negative numbers.

I dont have ny board at the moment so I can not give the exact variation, it is only from memory and I dont play accelerated Dragon as black since it is  very hard to win against a good players vs the Bind.

About Bc4 Yugoslav like and Qa5 line, it is true that it forces 0-0 but the drawbacks are than white can play a later Nb3 that tranpsoses to Dragon 0-0 line with the difference that whites attack is stronger since black will either be a tempo down on a normal line or place the Queen at c7 that rules out any Rxc3 exchange sacs line. I won a team match lasting seasons as white in this line when black became desperation when my attack got started quickly.

I agree and I would suggest that you first have a glance at the Gurgenidze set-up vs. the Maroczy. imo it is the easiest setup to learn and remember and not particularly easy for the White player to prove anything. But you will need good endgame skills to face the main line (though some interesting alternatives for Black do exist e.g. for the connoisseurs: ...Qxa2 vs. 7. f3).

Well, it seems that the Acc. Dragon is more a draw weapon against hard oposition than nothing else, isn't it?

But I'm going to try here and there and we'll see if it suits me (especially against Exchange French entusiats  xDD)...

thx !