chess database

Chess Database

Share and you will uncover!
Nutty name, real matters
[ Sign up | Log in | Guest ] (beta)
atrifix 169 ( +1 | -1 )
9. Bc4 Qa5 Dragon After doing some research into the Sicilian Dragon with 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 g6 6. Be3 Bg7 7. f3 0-0 8. Qd2 Nc6 9. Bc4 Qa5, I've come to the conclusion that it's practically refuted. Specifically the variation I am interested in continues 10. 0-0-0 Bd7 11. h4 Rfc8 12. Bb3 Ne5 13. g4, but also 13. h5 seems very strong. I'd like to hear from anyone who plays the Dragon (or anyone else) to see what they think or if there are any new ideas in these variations.

Some lines:
13. h5 Nxh5 14. Nd5 Qxd2+ 15. Rxd2 Kf8 16. g4 Nf6 17. Rdh2 Nxd5 18. Bxd5. White appears to have the advantage here, I'm not sure why this hasn't been analyzed very much.

13. g4 Nc4 14. Bxc4 Rxc4 15. h5 Rac8 16. Nb3 Qa6 17. hxg6 fxg6 18. e5 Ne8 19. Qh2 h5 20. Bd4 Rxd4 21. Rxd4 Rxc3 22. bxc3 Bxe5 23. Qd2.
Chris Ward gives this as 'unclear', but that seems pretty optimistic to me (+/- seems more appropriate). As far as I know, this has never occurred in a game.

13. g4 Rc4 14. g5 Nh5 15. f4 Rxd4 16. Qxd4 Ng4 17. e5 Ng3 18. Rhe1 Nf5 19. Qd5 Qxd5 20. Nxd5 e6 21. Bg1 exd5 22. Bxd5.
Also supposed to be somehow unclear, but it looks like White is just winning to me.

13. g4 b5 14. h5 Nc4 15. Bxc4 bxc4 16. Bh6 Bh8 17. Nf5 Re8 (17... Bxf5 18. exf5 is strong) 18. Qg5 Qb6 19. hxg6 fxg6 20. Bg7+- from the famous Nunn-Ward game. Also very strong is 18. hxg6 fxg6 19. Bg7, which should also just win for White (19... gxf5 20. Bxh8 Kxh8 21. Qh6).

13. g4 b5 14. h5 b4 (This line is the most interesting. I don't know of many games with this variation) 15. Nd5 Nxd5 16. exd5 Nc4 17. Qf2 Nxe3 (or 17... Qxd5 18. hxg6 hxg6 19. Qh4 Qe5 20. Bg5) 18. Qxe3 Qc7 19. Qxe7 Re8 20. Qh4 a5 21. hxg6 hxg6 22. f4 a4 23. f5 Qd8 24. f6 Qxf6 25. g5 Qd8 26. Ne6 Bxe6 27. dxe6 axb3 28. exf7+ Kxf7 29. Qc4++-.

I'd just like to see what people think, and if anyone else has looked into these lines. Consider it a challenge to anyone who plays the ...Qa5 dragon :)
gibo 68 ( +1 | -1 )
i personally play 9.0-0-0 as recommended by beating the sicilian 3. I have found often in the 9.Bc4 variation black ends up blocking whites attack with a timely h5 and white merely waits to get killed on the queenside. Black players of the dragon often dont know 9.0-0-0 so well and play it like 9.Bc4 responding with 9...Bd7 which is bad and gives white crucial tempo insted of mucking around with bc4 bb3 and then takes the knight on c4 when it can often be taken straight from f1. Sorry if i haven't really answered your question about 9..Qa5 to 9.Bc4 If i were you i would take a look at some of Kasparov's games in the dragon which he played against anand.
atrifix 38 ( +1 | -1 )
I'm aware that White can play other things on move 9, but to analyze the Dragon as a whole would be beyond reasonable expectations, so right now I'm only interested in variations that continue 9. Bc4 Qa5. I've looked at the Kasparov-Anand games, but things in the dragon have changed dramatically in the past decade since the match, and none of those games featured the ...Qa5 variation.
divine_sun_cat 81 ( +1 | -1 )
Hope some help? This was the only game I could find for the position you said you couldn't find. Hope you can use your chessbase fonts to decode it! I've put a few other games in from recently - i guess you may well have them though. No comments on the games though!

Del Rio Angelis,S (2490) - Martin Gonzalez,A (2410) [B79]
TCh-ESP, Mondariz ESP (1), 2002

1.e4 c5 2.口3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.巳d4 口6 5.勺3 g6 6.占3 卮7 7.f3 勺6 8.ι2 0-0 9.卉4 卡7 10.0-0-0 ζ5 11.h4 叉5 12.半3 圩c8 13.g4 勺4 14.台c4 寺c4 15.h5 地c8 16.刃3 ζ6 17.hxg6 fxg6 18.e5 叉8 19.ν2 h5 20.卡4 寺d4 21.寺d4 寺c3 22.bxc3 台e5 23.ι2 hxg4 24.圯4 卯6 25.ν6 ▅7 26.fxg4 卉6 27.圩4 台h1 28.g5 卡5 29.gxf6 巳f6 30.ν7+ ▅8 31.ㄉg6 ㄉa2 32.千4 ζ1+ 33.▃2 ν1 34.寺f6+ exf6 35.ㄉf6+ ▆8 36.c4 ν2+ 37.▂3 μ3+ 38.▃2 ν2+ 39.▂1 κ5 40.ι8+ ▆7 41.cxd5 ㄉd4 42.ι7+ ▆8 43.θ8+ ▆7 44.ι7+ ▆8 45.θ8+ ▆7 46.ι7+ 1/2-1/2

Kovacevic,A (2547) - Markovic,M (2517) [B79]
Cup Yug M 2002 (6), 18.05.2002

1.e4 c5 2.口3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.巳d4 口6 5.勺3 g6 6.占3 卮7 7.f3 0-0 8.ι2 勺6 9.卉4 卡7 10.半3 ζ5 11.0-0-0 圩c8 12.h4 叉5 13.g4 b5 14.h5 勺4 15.台c4 寺c4 16.▁1 地c8 17.hxg6 fxg6 18.刃3 θ7 19.e5 寺c3 20.bxc3 叉8 21.exd6 ㄉd6 22.卡4 e5 23.台a7 ㄉd2 24.巳d2 口6 25.多e1 占6 26.叉4 千5 27.▁2 口4 28.圬6 地8 29.土5 卉4 30.圬7 h6 31.叉4 占2 32.千2 e4 33.卡4 台d4 34.寺d4 e3 35.刃3 圩8 36.寺f4 寺f4 37.寺e2 寺f3 38.千4 夙3 39.巳b5 ▆7 40.千4 ▅6 41.a4 ▄5 42.a5 ▃6 43.a6 ▂7 44.圯1 1-0

Milos,G (2592) - Kudrin,S (2538) [B79]
II American Continental Buenos Aires ARG (5), 22.08.2003

1.e4 c5 2.口3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.巳d4 口6 5.勺3 g6 6.占3 卮7 7.f3 勺6 8.ι2 0-0 9.卉4 卡7 10.0-0-0 ζ5 11.半3 圩c8 12.g4 叉5 13.h4 b5 14.h5 勺4 15.台c4 bxc4 16.hxg6 fxg6 17.▁1 地b8 18.糎1 η4 19.θ1 占8 20.a3 η7 21.叉6 去8 22.多4 圭6 23.e5 卯7 24.土5 dxe5 25.圬h1 h5 26.gxh5 巳h5 27.巳f7 │f7 28.叉4 卯6 29.夙4 夙8 30.ι2 圭c8 31.θ3 ι5 32.多2 ι1+ 33.糎2 夙d8 34.多g2 ㄉf3 35.土5+ 台g5 36.寺g5 口6 37.寺g6 圬5 38.夙7+ ▄6 39.寺e7+ │e7 40.卉5+ 圭xc5 41.ㄉf3 e4 42.夙7+ ▄6 43.ν3+ 圩5 44.寺a7 圭e5 45.θ3 圭5 46.ι4 圩e5 47.地6+ ▅7 48.ι8 圩5 49.地7+ ▆6 50.λ8 圩e5 51.地6 1-0

Kudrin,S (2540) - Aramil,W (2166) [B79]
11th Open Chicago USA (6), 27.05.2002

1.e4 c5 2.口3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.巳d4 口6 5.勺3 g6 6.占3 卮7 7.f3 0-0 8.ι2 勺6 9.卉4 卡7 10.0-0-0 ζ5 11.h4 叉5 12.半3 圩c8 13.g4 b5 14.h5 b4 15.勺e2 勺4 16.台c4 寺c4 17.▁1 地c8 18.hxg6 fxg6 19.口4 寺d4 20.台d4 e5 21.g5 叉8 22.ν2 exf4 23.ㄉh7+ ▅7 24.台g7 巳g7 25.寺d6 占6 26.寺e6 1-0

ccmcacollister 45 ( +1 | -1 )
GIBO, sure enough works Great doesnt it! When BL goes ahead and gives up 2 tempii by insisting on the Nc6-Ne5-Nc4 maneuver when WT can answer via Bf1xc4 . I've used the idea a number of times in OTB play with good result [As expected! Black can't afford to give up One tempo in the Dragon! Even without analysis seems a 2 tempii loss has got to bring on a violent K-death.] Of course, as you suggest, an informed BL player will choose
from the 3 or so much better options there.