Is the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon Unsound?

For the past two weeks I have adopted the Sicilian as my response to 1 e4, more specifically the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon. I did this based on the recommendation from Chess openings for Black, Explained by Lev Alburt, Roman Dzind... and Eugene Perel... While I like the opening, I have browsed some chess databases, mostly chessgames.com and I feel discouraged.

According to chessgames.com, B38 variation gives White over 24% better winning chances, B36 gives white over 20% better chances, and B39 gives White 28% better chances. Considering like this, I'm beginning to wonder if the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon is sound and if it is worth it to continue with it. After all, these percentages are abysmal. Why is this?

I'm feeling really let down, how could these smart GMs recommend an opening which gives White a 20%+ better chance of winning in normal lines!!??

Originally posted by exigentsky
For the past two weeks I have adopted the Sicilian as my response to 1 e4, more specifically the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon. I did this based on the recommendation from Chess openings for Black, Explained by Lev Alburt, Roman Dzind... and Eugene Perel... While I like the opening, I have browsed some chess databases, mostly chessgames.com and I feel discoura GMs recommend an opening which gives White a 20%+ better chance of winning in normal lines!!??

Do you seriously think that because white wins about 25% more games than black, you will lose 25% more games?

Also, do you think they would let you down on purpose?

I think it's partly about cuting down the different lines that white can choose. You can specialise in a few lines rather than have to know many.

I'm feeling really let down, how could these smart GMs recommend an opening which gives White a 20%+ better chance of winning in normal lines!!??

These guys are out to sell books and tapes. There was no "secret" Russian training method that would make you a master. Just ask them how many of their students actually reach expert ot master level. If you want to play good openings, see what the Grandmasters play in tmts. when cash, rating points and reputation are on the line.

Originally posted by exigentsky
For the past two weeks I have adopted the Sicilian as my response to 1 e4, more specifically the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon. I did this based on the recommendation from Chess openings for Black, Explained by Lev Alburt, Roman Dzind... and Eugene Perel... While I like the opening, I have browsed some chess databases, mostly chessgames.com and I feel discoura ...[text shortened]... GMs recommend an opening which gives White a 20%+ better chance of winning in normal lines!!??

There are inferior defenses in chess and the stats point that out. I don't know much about this opening but I'm not surprised that it's inferior. Nevertheless, a minority of gms play inferior defenses. So inferior does not necessarily mean losing. The late great ironman played the inferior leningrad dutch with great success, for example.

So what makes an inferior defense playable? Only a few valid lines. Inferior defenses suffer from a lack of flexibility. One must know the correct way to proceed with little room for error. This is in contrast with superior defenses which are more forgiving.

Originally posted by exigentsky
For the past two weeks I have adopted the Sicilian as my response to 1 e4, more specifically the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon. I did this based on the recommendation from Chess openings for Black, Explained by Lev Alburt, Roman Dzind... and Eugene Perel... While I like the opening, I have browsed some chess databases, mostly chessgames.com and I feel discoura ...[text shortened]... GMs recommend an opening which gives White a 20%+ better chance of winning in normal lines!!??

All you need is one good line through each varation. Sometimes this statistics are just corpse counting for failed attempts at finding the right move. If there are 10 options and only one is good, you are going to win most of your games if you follow the "best line". If you have a database you can follow the various lines and find good ones. In the Sicilian as in many other openings there are a lot more bad lines that good ones.

As I have said before, choose an opening you feel gives you good chances. I played dragons before and good players with databases were crushing me, so I stepped back and now play Najdorfs. The fianchetto on the kingside was giving my opponents too many ways in. You'll find some players here who like Dragons and play it frequently and have good results, but I didn't feel comfortable with it (even tho i bought a book on the dragon). It's a matter of adjusting and not letting others (even Lev Alburt) decide what you're going to do. Have you thought of double king pawn openings, and forgetting Sicilians completely?

My main question is: Is the Hyper Accelerated Dragon actualyl an inferior defense or are the statistics misleading?

Originally posted by exigentsky
My main question is: Is the Hyper Accelerated Dragon actualyl an inferior defense or are the statistics misleading?

My question is: What the hell is the "Hyper" Accelerated Dragon?? Give the characteristic moves please.

Originally posted by no1marauder
My question is: What the hell is the "Hyper" Accelerated Dragon?? Give the characteristic moves please.

Haha,I was wondering that too..........

Originally posted by Ravello
Haha,I was wondering that too..........

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6

Originally posted by lukemcmullan
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6

Well,the names given by Chessgames.com for this opening set up are:
B27: Sicilian
B35: Sicilian, Accelerated Fianchetto, Modern Variation with Bc4
B38: Sicilian, Accelerated Fianchetto, Maroczy Bind, 6.Be3
B36: Sicilian, Accelerated Fianchetto
B39: Sicilian, Accelerated Fianchetto, Breyer Variation
B34: Sicilian, Accelerated Fianchetto
B74: Sicilian, Dragon, Classical
A04: Reti Opening
B76: Sicilian, Dragon, Yugoslav Attack

Sorry,no "Hyper accelerated Dragon"........

Originally posted by lukemcmullan
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6

Those moves themselves are B27 in the ECO, so if he's looking at B34-38, he's looking at the standard Accelerated Dragon which is considered somewhat suspect against the Maroczy Bind formation. I wouldn't call it "unsound", however.

dragon
e4 e5
nf3 d6
d4 cd
nxd4 nf6
nc3 g6!?

accelarated dragon
e4 e5
nf3 d6
d4 cd
nxd4 g6!? (allowing 5.c4 the maroczy bind)

hyper accelarated dragon
e4 e5
nf3 g6!? (pretty hyper accelarated if you ask me)



everything else you guys were looking at were transpositions so stop criticizing someone when you dont know what youre talking about. and just because it doesnt have its own ECO or MCO code or whatever doesnt mean it doesnt exist.


secondly, that opening may be inferior but, with good knowledge of a very sharp tactical opening, like the dragon etc. you should destroy someone who is not used to playing that opening. for example, kasparov crushed anand with the evans gambit, an opening known to equalize for black but very tactical. Kasparov came up with a novelty to crush Anand because kasparov already knew exactly what to play pretty much and anand could not come up with the right moves over the board, even though anand had opportunities to equalize. similarly if you really learn the hyperaccelarated dragon you should easily crush anyone unfamiliar with this highly tactical opening, even if it is somewhat inferior. also when we talk about inferior openings we talk about openings that lead to poor pawn structure or bad bishops etc. and at our level (not GM) it becomes difficult to exploit these. so for example, if some plays the black side of the evans (i know this opening decently welll) perfectly, they come out with the bishop pair and better pawn structure. so even if a 1500 player managed to maneuver the tactics of the opening he would still have essentially an equal game. i mean, the worst opening, damiano defense, only gives up an exchange which you all know can easily be given up at the club level. i have a friend who has the damiano defense down pat and beats stronger players (elo 1600) with it!
however, that being said, unless youre trying to make a few bucks at the local tournament learning openings is a bad way to improve your chess. i feel that by practicing middlegames and endgames you will actually improve as a chessplayer faster and more solidly. what happens if you face e4 c5 Nc3!? the knowledge of the dragon becomes somewhat worthless.
well those are my two cents

Yeah, your right, there is no Hyper-Accelerated Dragon there but the thing is that the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon transposes into those, for example B36.

Also, I understand that even an inferior opening can be turned into a winning weapon with the proper knowledge, but the very idea taht I am playing something that is considered inferior makes me concerned. If I think it is inferior (I'm unsure now) then I will not feel confident while playing it. Second of all, it will become a liability when I get better and the opening starts to really make the difference between winning or losing. Sure, I could switch openings then, but that could prove even more disastrous since I understand that once you get an opening you need to become an expert in ti and that could take years, I wouldn't be able to just throw it away if I get to that level.