TD wrote on 08/09/18 at 18:15:17:


Have you any more news about this ¿ I cannot find any information about what the books are, or which publisher.

If you're going to go for Ward's book, why not go for the ChessPublishing Dragons section by the very same author instead? My impression is that Ward quite often includes games because they are thematic or striking even if they're not theoretically critical, to a larger extent than most of the other columnists.

I also believe quite a bit of the same strategic content as in Winning With the Dragon 2 may be found in the early years of the ChessPublishing archives. Though I don't have the book myself, so I can't compare them directly. Of course with ChessPublishing you would also get a by now enormous number of commented games and the latest theory as a "bonus"!

There is one Dragon book that's entirely built around the typical themes of the opening: Secrets of the Sicilian Dragon by Gufeld and Schiller. I have it, but I haven't used it enough to give an informed opinion. The two authors are not exactly known for always delivering profound, high-quality work... but I don't believe this one was their worst effort.

gillbod wrote on 03/27/19 at 10:41:19:

https://www.kobo.com/us/en/ebook/the-fighting-dragon

Stigma wrote on 08/10/18 at 15:03:02:


Absolutely correct, this option is only available to those who play the Accelerated version.

RoleyPoley wrote on 08/10/18 at 10:10:12:

No.

For something different against the Yugoslav, check out Panjwani's own system given in his The Hyper Accelerated Dragon.

Thanks.

Don't worry too much about spelling. If it's really bad I correct it for you.
Don't worry about my purchasing habits either. In time I'll decide to buy Jones (at first sight that one looks addressing my needs best) or Dearing.
I have one question left. Would playing 9.Kh1 a6 a good idea as well or is a plan with leaving the bishop on c1 more dangerous? Especially 10.a4 Be6 11.f4 ?
Again it would be nice to learn what Move by Move says about 10.Kh1. Light coverage as well?

bragesjo wrote on 08/16/16 at 07:29:28:

Thanks.

XChess1971 wrote on 08/16/16 at 12:46:07:

I've been pretty sure since more than 20 years that 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 e5 (my choice as I wrote in my previous post) is not an Accelerated Dragon, but a Kalashnikov. I only play 3...g6 if White has played Nc3.
I'd welcome 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.c4 e6 4.d4 cxd4 5.Nxd4 Nf6 6.Nc3 as Black does excellently after Bb4. 4.Be2 b6 5.O-O Bb7 6.d4 cxd4 7.Nxd4 Qb8 also seems fine.
Tony Rotella recommends 2.c4 Nc6 3.Nc3 e5 4.Nf3 g6.
The Kalashnikov-Accelerated Dragon combo is waterproof.

I forgot MNb also you have 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.c4. There is 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 as well.

I notice the topic isn't about the book anymore...

It's highly unlikely that I'll ever play the Dragon Proper. More than twenty years ago I have played the Accelerated Dragon (and even the Semi-Accelerated Dragon) for a while. Back then I already realized this avoids

(1) the Yugoslav Attack with 9.O-O-O
(2) the Yugoslav Attack with 9.g4.

That was in the time IM Silman advocated his gambit against the Maroczy Bind, eg Anka-Silman, Budapest 1994. And I realized some more.
When I gave up the French two years ago I bought Tony Rotella's excellent Killer Sicilian and worked my way through it. I liked it very much and quickly spotted a small but important error. Tony was kind and honest enough to admit it when I pointed it out to him.

"The problem is that normal moves like ...... 3...g6 ... are met by 4.d4, when we're out of our repertoire."
Nope. 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 g6 4.d4 cxd4 5.Nxd4 Bg7 not only avoids (1) and (2), but also

(3) the Maroczy Bind

and hence is an excellent complement to the Kalashnikov.
Of course I had to redo all my outdated work again. To my joy I could expand the list a bit more. Black can even avoid

(4) your Pseudo-Yugoslav with Be2 iso f3 as Black will play ...d5 in one go.
(5) the topical Yugoslav variation with 9.Bc4, 10.O-O-O, 11.Bb3 and 12.Kb1.

So I get 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 g6 4.d4 cxd4 5.Nxd4 Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Bc4 O-O 8.Bb3 d6 9.f3 Bd7. No doubt you will immediately recognize this as an irregular version of the Yugoslav Attack. There is a lot to say about this. Things are tricky from here due to many subtle transpositions. Any conclusion depends on two factors. The first is the evaluation of main systems like the Soltis and the Chinese Dragon; the second is the evaluation of independent options like the Forintos Variation (10...Nxd4 11.Bxd4 b5) which is quite similar to the Topalov Variation. White also has a few independent options available. While I don't underestimate the work involved (I have been doing quite some over the years) it's still less than the Dragon Proper. Plus there is the chance to bewilder White with smart move orders.

White can deviate with 9.h3 which becomes the Sozin-Short Variation (6.Bc4 against the Dragon).
Further back White has 7.Be2 O-O 8.Nb3 (8.Qd2 d5!) d6 9.O-O and about twenty years ago I won a nice corr. game with Be6 10.f4 Rc8 and the exchange sac on c3.
If anything then 7.Nxc6 bxc6 8.e5 Ng8 is good for Black.
Also I noticed that 6.Nde2 Nf6 7.g3 O-O 8.Bg2 Rb8 9.a4 a6 10.O-O b5 is an improved version (for Black)of the Counterfianchetto 6.g3 against the Dragon Proper.
So 6.Nb3 Nf6 7.Be2 O-O 8.O-O d6 9.Bg5, 9.Re1 and 9.Kh1 remain.

None of this is critical for my choice; I already have returned to the Kalashnikov. It just would be nice to complete my repertoire against 1.e4. As buying a 500 pages book on the Dragon Proper for 10 pages on these three Classical lines is not exactly economical I would appreciate it if some Dragon expert gave me a few hints (9.Bg5 a6 it will be). Books on the Accelerated Dragon probably are not very useful either, because they prefer to avoid the Dragon Proper, while I want to steer at it on my conditions.

Of course it would be fantastic if someone wrote a book on transposing (or not) from the Accelerated Dragon to the Dragon Proper. I pondered asking Tony Rotella, but he's still recovering from The Killer Sicilian.

Move by move seemingly refers to the format with lots of text and especially the questions. Really deep/comprehensive theory not to be expected.
(The introduction actually explicitly denies trying to provide this.).

bragesjo wrote on 08/12/16 at 17:38:40:


That's an unhelpful answer. I asked a question, I did not intend to start a discussion. I asked you because I very well know you know a lot more about the Dragon than me. The answer may be common knowledge, I don't know it or I wouldn't have asked. You're not exactly a great guy for helping out an ignorant like me.
For instance you could have offered a couple of relevant and representative games to help me on my way. You preferred not to do so.
Well, I guess this

Quote:

was not a sincere question then.
...... (insert your favourite abusive term, preferably in Swedish).

MNb wrote on 08/12/16 at 15:52:46:


About equality in Karpov system its no point discussing is common knowledge that black has equal chanses in mainlines like 8 .. Nc6 9 Nb3. a6, Unless something major has happended since I deserted the Dragon and it was for other reasons. True I lost team match once in Karpov system but my opponnet had about 500 more in Swedisch rating at that time (some 16 years ago) but I had nothing to do with the opening, He simply handled the middlegame better and won from an equal position, computer was even -0.1 evaluation at some point. He would have won regardless of opening since he played in Swedish Championships 2nd heigest class while I only played in small local tournaments and at Internet.

I think that openings in generall is about getting a comfortable position not to get a theoretical position one does not like or are unfamilar with. I play Be2 yugoslav like vs Dragon and Be2 systems vs some other sicilians and g3 position vs some. It gives no theoretical advantage but I gets a active practical position I like and understands and as a bonus I can play Be2 vs Classical with no fear of transposing to Dragon. Karpov was in my eyes a very practical player and I would say the Karpov system is about the same thing, getting a comfortable position easy to maintain.

bragesjo wrote on 08/12/16 at 10:38:56:


I had one here:

http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/chess/YaBB.pl?num=1450097237/8#8

I am happy to repeat it:

Which line in the Karpov system (Be2, Bg5) does maintain equality for Black according to you?
What does this book say about it?

I got this book today. Any questions about any concrete lines?

First look indicates that my white pet line s Dragon is covered very little.

The introduction is dated July 2016.
Really no games for 2015 / 2016?
If finished 2015, the date should (would?) not be 2016.

Seeley wrote on 07/27/16 at 21:17:29:


I agree - probably that's the case: first publication date was October 2015.
The book still will be valuable for those making first steps in the Dragon to learn some patterns through extended pros and check which line they like the most. Then one can delve into Jones books to see the most reliable lines.
I won't buy it but will probably have a look at it when buying for my friend.

AJZ wrote on 07/27/16 at 19:14:22:

Very strange indeed. And there seem to be no games after 2014.

I my first Dragon repertour I went for e5 line but theory developed.
I switched to Nxc3 line and later swithed opening. I have never played Bxd4 line since its not my taste

In Nxc3 line black can get very good compensation for the pawn if white does not play very very accurate.
I won a few nice games with it.
However white can get a += queen endgame in some line.

AJZ wrote on 07/22/16 at 10:42:00:


It doesn't bother me at all in regards to the Dragon's soundness.  What bothers me is that the author is still calling the ...e5 variation the mainline.  I'd prefer he called it the old main line or something else. 

I'm sure Black has winning chances in the alternative variations but they're not really to my taste.  When you're weak like myself, you need tactical chances for a mating attack or win a rook for no compensation.

Glenn Snow wrote on 07/22/16 at 02:36:52:


That sentence bothers me too.

I'm sure the book has a lot to offer but the following sentence bothers me a bit, "In Games 30 and 31, we enter the ‘real’ main line after 12...e5 13 Bc5, which has been the topic of discussion for many years."  That certainly used to be the main line of 9.O-O-O but since Black is close to lost after 12...e5 it certainly isn't the main line anymore.

bragesjo wrote on 07/19/16 at 15:08:47:


Was it the one by Sneider or by Gufeld and Stetsko?

My inspiration was from Ward's books. They weren't anywhere near 400 pages from what i can remember but got me playing confidently. Shame the lines werent sound   

I've still got to read Eddie Dearing's book on the Dragon, must do so soon

I have the impression that a highly complex opening such as the Dragon Sicilian cannot be fully explained in a 'Move by Move' book, but at least I guess this can be a good introduction.

It's hard to tell from the excerpt anything about quality of the book. It's interesting/surprising that he didn't concentrate on narrow repetoire for Black as even the narrow would be a big one. Maybe he wanted to point why some lines aren't good - probably the only thing that excellent GM Jones books are lacking sometimes (for example: Jones chose 12...Bxd4! in the 9.0-0-0 mainline but said nothing, not even briefly, about 12...e5?! and 12...Nxc3!?)
We can only trust in Hansen name as he produced some very good books in the past, including the one about the Accelerated Dragon.