Is the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon Unsound?

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

Yeah - the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon isn't really sound - but the Accelerated Dragon is! In fact, if you play the right line you have a certain draw as Black playing the Accelerated Dragon - which could get to be a bit boring...

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Hi and welcome to RHP.

You joined today and are replying to a post two years old.

Good.

Are you going to go through all the old posts. There are some really
good posts that need answering from 5 years ago.

I may have to...this is going to take a long time!

Does it really matter if it is two years old? I don't think so - it was still up on the server, and I still was able to respond to it, and then you showed up also, so you also posted on a forum that is two years old - however, you didn't even contribute to the idea of the forum... :-)

The biggest thing that peeved me on this forum was the lack of any discussion about the opening...some here, some there - but instead of saying why I think something is inferior, why not talk about it, instead of just talking about stats? That goes nowhere. I wanted to post about this opening in a way that spoke about Alburt and Dzindzi's teaching style - catering to a player who is just beginning to learn. Their point is that the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon cuts down on study, and it is reliable enough that stars such as Kramnik have even played it in strong match play. As a matter of fact, they go so far as to try to focus on early bishop play in 1. d4 as well.

But I have already stated most of this previously. I simply wanted to give anyone who read up to my post something more to think about that, "OMG! My opening choice for Black doesn't have the highest win percentage!". Often, a high win percentage also means a high loss percentage, and low draws...that is the nature of the game.

Originally posted by Doug Pinson
I may have to...this is going to take a long time!

Does it really matter if it is two years old? I don't think so - it was still up on the server, and I still was able to respond to it, and then you showed up also, so you also posted on a forum that is two years old - however, you didn't even contribute to the idea of the forum... :-)

The biggest ...[text shortened]... centage also means a high loss percentage, and low draws...that is the nature of the game.

you can also create new threads you know. 🙂 when you resurrect Old threads, people tend to reply to people most of whom have left the site ages ago, which obviously goes nowhere.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes, this is also amazing 1.g3 2.Bg2 and 3.c4! good luck your opponents are going to need it! the best part is when they take the centre and suddenly realise that its not so strong as they once imagined!

how odd, I think the center is pretty strong all the way.


This must be some new idea in chess, the center is not worthwhile.


As a proper Hyper-modern, I thought you'd appreciate the center, as the
focus of all of your development.


-GIN

Originally posted by Nowakowski
how odd, I think the center is pretty strong all the way.


This must be some new idea in chess, the center is not worthwhile.


As a proper Hyper-modern, I thought you'd appreciate the center, as the
focus of all of your development.


-GIN

yes, but with pieces, not pawns! the reference they, was to our opponents pawns, apologise if that was unclear.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes, but with pieces, not pawns! the reference they, was to our opponents pawns, apologise if that was unclear.

Oh indeed.


I retract my statements then.


-GIN

Originally posted by wormwood
you can also create new threads you know. 🙂 when you resurrect Old threads, people tend to reply to people most of whom have left the site ages ago, which obviously goes nowhere.

We could recreate a new thread, but it defeated the point that I was trying to express...I was responding to this idea. Just because this thread is older than 2 weeks does not make it obsolete. I have brought it back to life, and it has a few more posts now. I found it enlightening, even though it was older than most threads on this site.

Let me ask you this - do you ever go back to old chess books and look into them for new ideas? Same concept. Honestly, I had no clue that this thread was that old. As a matter of fact, the whole reason I came to this site that day was because I typed "hyper sicilian" in the Google forum, and this was one of the first links that popped up. That means that if others on the internet type the same words, they are most likely going to find this forum - which was a bit disappointing to me.

So yes, we could make a new thread, but I didn't want to create a new thread (although I may now, since there is obviously some interest in the Hyper Sicilian).

But guys, seriously - why are you asking me about posting on an old forum, when the point of this thread is whether the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon was sound? If you aren't a GM, I am sure it is perfectly playable, and even at GM level, I am sure it is playable - but maybe it doesn't give the same dynamic chances that other forms of the Sicilian offer.

As far as the person who originated this thread leaving, that may be so. But others are still reading it. Think about it - I read it, and so have you. The forum is still valid.