Sicilian Dragon

I've been looking at the Sicilian Dragon, and considering playing it. It looks like a great "defence" (in the loose sense of the word) involving sharp, tactical play.

What is the current theoretical state of this opening? I know that "refutations" are constantly being discovered which are not refutations at all when some other Dragon theorist comes up with the right counter. Which lines are sound? Which aren't?

I'm also looking for somewhere on the web where I can find some annotated Dragon games for free (I've already played through the five on the Exeter Chess Club website).

Also, what do you all think of the Dragon?

Thanks in advance.

Luke.

Originally posted by lukemcmullan
I've been looking at the Sicilian Dragon, and considering playing it. It looks like a great "defence" (in the loose sense of the word) involving sharp, tactical play.

What is the current theoretical state of this opening? I know that "refutations" are constantly being discovered which are not refutations at all when some other Dragon theorist ...[text shortened]...

Also, what do you all think of the Dragon?

Thanks in advance.

Luke.

Originally posted by Sicilian Smaug
I am he

Originally posted by lukemcmullan
Lol, clever.

In answer to your question, the Sicilian Dragon is characterised by the kingside fianchetto by Black in the Sicilian Defence.

A fianchetto (pronounced fian-keyyetto, it's Italian) is where you put a bishop on b2, g2, b7 or g7 to make use of the long diagonal.

Originally posted by lukemcmullan
A fianchetto (pronounced fian-keyyetto, it's Italian) is where you put a bishop on b2, g2, b7 or g7 to make use of the long diagonal.

The Dragon has not been refuted as a valid opening. White currently seems to be having good success with lines involving an early g4 but there are so many different lines that it's impossible to give an overall survey.

This is a typical Sicilian Dragon opening sequence...

1.e4 c5
2.Nf3 d6
3.d4 cd
4.Nxd4 Nf6
5.Nc3 g6
6.Be3 Bg7
7.f3 0-0
8.Qd2 Nc6
9.Bc4 Bd7
10.0-0-0 Rc8

Originally posted by Stives
This is a typical Sicilian Dragon opening sequence...

1.e4 c5
2.Nf3 d6
3.d4 cd
4.Nxd4 Nf6
5.Nc3 g6
6.Be3 Bg7
7.f3 0-0
8.Qd2 Nc6
9.Bc4 Bd7
10.0-0-0 Rc8

Nice one Xanthos.

Originally posted by lukemcmullan
I've been looking at the Sicilian Dragon, and considering playing it. It looks like a great "defence" (in the loose sense of the word) involving sharp, tactical play.

What is the current theoretical state of this opening? I know that "refutations" are constantly being discovered which are not refutations at all when some other Dragon theorist ...[text shortened]...

Also, what do you all think of the Dragon?

Thanks in advance.

Luke.

Originally posted by lukemcmullan
A fianchetto (pronounced fian-keyyetto, it's Italian) is where you put a bishop on b2, g2, b7 or g7 to make use of the long diagonal.

Originally posted by powershaker
But, if White castles Queen side, Black's fian-debto on the black squares is weak, that is unless you're a strong player and can play the theoretical lines well, and aren't afraid of making a wild Tal sacrifice. Let's face it. Dragon is romantic and strong in Pillsbury's day. Today, it's weak. Even Fischer said so!

Originally posted by powershaker
But, if White castles Queen side, Black's fian-debto on the black squares is weak, that is unless you're a strong player and can play the theoretical lines well, and aren't afraid of making a wild Tal sacrifice. Let's face it. Dragon is romantic and strong in Pillsbury's day. Today, it's weak. Even Fischer said so!