Sicilian Dragon, REFUTED!!!

Yes folks, I can say it loud and proud, that the Sicilian Dragon is a dubious system that has been REFUTED!!! Any dragon players out there who disagree, write a note and will argue the point.

Here are the lines.

5. ... Qc7

Actually, this line is fine for black and gives compensation in the form of better development, monster bishops, and a possible queenside attack.

Woof, for a second I thought someone actually had refuted it after the decades of study poured into it 

yes black won't exchange queens on d5, theory says 13...Qc7 as shown here earlier. and in case 14.Qxa8 black answers with Bf5 15.Qxf8+ which will be Q for two rooks and a pawn. I am not sure of the assesment of this position though, unclear or equal chances or maybe even slightly better for black because of the initiative he has now on white's king. and it's far from easy for white to make it to the endgame safely (exchange bishops).

and one more correction:

after 10.Nxc6 bxc6 11.exd5 black takes with the knight first, the move order is impotant here, because on your diagram 11...cxd5 white has Bd4 countering the dragon bishop. however on 11...Nxd5 12.Bd4 doesn't work like before because of 12...e5 13.Bc5 Be6 black sacks the exchange for play on queenside and minor piece play. which is also theory.  

 I think it's Be6 and not Bf5 to prevent Bc4 and Bb3.  I was scared too. I think the best line for white is,

WOW Alex-F! didn't know this line. knew e5 for white but not the queen sac. Thanks!

I've seen that line before-honestly, I would be excited to take up the black side. I'm currently not playing the dragon, however. I'm busy using the Dragadorf

 whats that?

It's a hybrid between the dragon and najdorf. I like it because it's fun, pretty sharp, and can lead to very interesting play. It leaves a lot of room for creativity, and there's only been one book written about it to my knowledge.

Can you post the first few moves?

funny how hiding the best line can refute (nearly) any system

You could start a daily column in which you reveal a refutation-except-for-better-lines of EVERY opening.

Of course, there could be another column in which somebody refutes all of the refutations by assuming they avoid better moves in every line.

And so on.

A provocative way of getting people to actually analyze some lines in the Dragon.

In case someone is really worried about the statement in the topic-starter's post: this variation has nothing to do with refuting the Dragon.

Someone better tell Carlsen the dragon is refuted as he is STILL playing it !!  LOL 

He could learn much from the players here.

Yeah.  And somebody better tell him Fischer busted the King's Gambit decades ago. 

*sigh*  Just think, all these years and all those GMs missed this analysis...

I'll message you some stuff.

Yeah, as a Dragon player from the beginning of my chess career (roughly 1300 rated in tournament play) I can say that the Dragon does indeed have its sketchy points. But, even in those "border line" variations for black -- there is a ton of theory and complications... Not quite refuted yet, but I agree it does have its problems.

lol southpawsam, once I was analyzing a tiny bit of the dragon and came up with this very line you posted, but I figured black simply has good compensation for his pawn and 5...Qc7 followed by moves like ...Be6 has been a good recomendation.