Why play the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon?

I am creating this thread in response to an old thread which provoked the question - is the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon sound?

If I recall, Wojo was a user of this opening, as well as Kramnik, to mention a couple of big names.

I believe that nails in the head that this opening most definitely offers chances for the Black player. So I invite discussion surrounding the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon.

We begin with the main-line...I don't want to branch off right now into the Anti-Sicilians, although we can discuss that as well.

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 g6...

Black is stating that he is just fine without the move ...d6, which we see in traditional Dragon setups. However, there is some give and take in this opening. Black has definitely shown his cards...the king bishop is heading to g7, where it will fight for control of the long diagonal.

Black has refrained from moving the d-pawn early - he wants a chance to play to ...d5 in one move. However, he can always revert back to traditional Dragon lines by playing ...d6 at a preferred moment. This tempo issue, according to Alburt and Dzindzi, can be crucial in dealing with the Yugoslav Attack, one of White's most ferocious onslaughts of the traditional Dragon.

So why not play the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon?

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 g6 3. d4 cxd 4. Nxd (or Qxd)...
Let's begin here with a discussion of the position.

Hi.

Welcome to RHP.

But all this was discussed in Thread 35494

Yes, but little of the thread consisted of actual thoughts concerning the lines that Black has to face. A few here, a few there, but not a lot of meat. It would be nice to have a thread with more meat in it, instead of a thread that took 30 messages to discuss stats, versus lines. Please, why don't you share a bit of your understanding of this line, if you are interested in the forum?

Hi - just having a wee joke.

I have a copy of Sicilian Accelerated Dragons by Levy (1972).

http://www.chessedinburgh.co.uk/chandlerarticle.php?ChandID=5

Out of date theorectically but it does give all the main ideas and
some wonderful wee tricks and traps. A good book.

And as a fan of the Black fianchetto I of course slung it out a few times.


Kind of felt that it does tip your hand too soon by playing g6 with c5.
Pircs, Moderns & Kids have the centre busting option of c5 & e5.

Think White can adopt an opening plan based on fact c5 has been
played - often faced c4 and it goes into some kind of English.

I liked to play c5/e5 AFTER White has played d4.

But like any opening it all depends on the better middle game player.

I think I can agree with you in some regards. There is some nice potential that Black can have with a delayed ...c5 or ...e5. Plus, the fact that he has not yet committed his pawn structure to either plan is another card he has. But, in another way, he has not as much early control of the center. So in this case, we have to cater towards the rational of the Sicilian 2...g6, as that is the defense at hand.

But another plus is not only the fact that Black has held back the d-pawn, but he has also held back the e-pawn. If the opponent were to play eccentrically, there could be an opportunity to advance to e5 in one move favorably (for instance, if for some reason Black was able to launch a kingside pawn roller). I couldn't necessarily give an account of an opening as such, but to sum it up this way - Black has both pawns at home. This tempo ought to be good.

My friend regularly plays 1. e4, and he has a pretty good grip on handling both 2...d6 and 2...e6. I played 2...g6 once against him, without any theory, just for fun. The game went well beyond the opening, into late middlegame, if not endgame (I can't remember right now). But the point is, he was not booked on theory, and so that was to my advantage.

I used to play the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon all the time, but there were too many times when I got into big trouble with it. Then I switched to the Accelerated Dragon which offered me better chances. Now I simply use the Dragon, which I feel can be transposed to other variations if the Dragon appears it may not be good. Either way, I stick with the Sicilian, which is my faithful companion.

Originally posted by AttilaTheHorn
I used to play the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon all the time, but there were too many times when I got into big trouble with it. Then I switched to the Accelerated Dragon which offered me better chances. Now I simply use the Dragon, which I feel can be transposed to other variations if the Dragon appears it may not be good. Either way, I stick with the Sicilian, which is my faithful companion.

Would you mind giving a couple of examples of troubles that you had with the 2...g6 move order? That would be a great way to get this forum rolling.

And of course, the Dragon is fully playable - but the Black player must be versed in it. Personally, I have played it before, but I know, that if you want to venture the Sicilian, often you will face players who are booked with GM recommendations. So often I don't tread GM paths, and get them thinking on their own (although recently I have been trying some more mainlines, such as 1. e4 e5).

Originally posted by F4forlife
Would you mind giving a couple of examples of troubles that you had with the 2...g6 move order? That would be a great way to get this forum rolling.

And of course, the Dragon is fully playable - but the Black player must be versed in it. Personally, I have played it before, but I know, that if you want to venture the Sicilian, often you will face pl king on their own (although recently I have been trying some more mainlines, such as 1. e4 e5).

>I'll just give general examples. I agree with greenpawn that playing 2...g6 just tips your hand too early. Eventually, I saw that it basically is not played by GMs and there is a reason for that. I think it allows White too much counterplay. I used to play the Pirc and I abandoned that for the same reason.
>With Pirc, I just kept getting positions that were far too constricted. With the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon, I often, but not always, had to face a ferocious counterattack. Having said that, both are playable. I just grew to prefer the Dragon instead of the Accelerated or the Hyper-Accelerated variation.
>I'm interested in hearing what you and others say.

I still play it with good results. It is an active system with a clear plan, no positional weaknesses and less theory than other lines like the Najdorf. If this appeals to you, give it a try. The only real downside is that some variations feel cramped and tend to be drawish (Maroczy bind). However, there are some antidotes as Sergei Tiviakov demonstrates in his videos.

a game illustrating possible problems. Though Kramnik is around 100 rating points higher. So perhaps the opening is irrelevant.



http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.pl?page=61&node=156243

here somewhat more even, carlsen draws against dominguez, though it did seem to transpose to a real dragon.