Sicilian Dragon.

I've been studying some of the critical variations of the Sicilian Dragon, and I have to say that the Dragon is one of the most theoretical openings that I've ever seen, after the Najdorf must to say, maybe one of the most sharpest and double-edge games arise from this crazy variation. But one of my impressions was that in the Modern Line of the Soltis Variation with 12.Kb1 instead of the pure Soltis (12.h4) Blacks just defends, I mean, the pet line 12...a6 of Carlsen maybe could offer more options, but I cannot see it clearly. Black have greats defensives sources, but early in the Middlegame, is White who have the upperhand, obviusly, a single little slip, and White could be lost and is mainly because in this opening exist few moments when you are better but not inmediately winning.
Here is an example of how Judit Polgar in one of his best games almost refute black set-up in the 12...Re8 line.



My question is: Black could aim for a win in this variation?
This line is the most critical continuation with white pieces, other options offer reasonable or even good play for black,
like 9.0-0-0 or 9.g4, and is heavy analysed and theorical, actually is white who have to prove something if he enters in this line.
So, the Sicilian Dragon (ignoring the fact of his name "Sicilian Defense"): a counterattacking opening or just another way to defend with black pieces?

It‘s very complicated and one cannot draw such simple conclusions. It is a respectable weapon with good chances for either side (unless they know the megatons of theory).

PS: I myself side-stepped with 3.Bb5+ with good results.

Yeah, and for that reason is my question. About the 3.Bb5+ Gawain Jones recommend to play an hyperaccelerated Dragon 2...g6 and then transpose to the main lines. Obviusly white have other options, like the Maroczy Bind, which is annoying for some Dragon players, and many others.

Btw, I've been learning the heavy theory of the Modern Line in the last month, and is mainly because too much people say that the Dragon is almost refuted. I mean, I learned the theory to avoid enter in those dangerous lines and better play the Topalov Variation or Chinese Variation. Those games with 12.Kb1 is exactly what you don't want to play (or defend with black pieces).

I think that the main line Dragon gives white too much time to attack and break through black's defense with h4, g4, etc. Black's pawn structure gives white the opportunity to put black on the defensive because of the threat of h4-h5, and black has to allow either the opening of the h file or g file (if after black goes h5 white goes g4), while white's king is safer because it is harder for black to open files to attack. Maybe the line you talked about with 12... a6 could give black better chances because of a more immediate attack on the queen side, but I feel that black will still have to deal with a lot of pressure from white's attack.

I used to play the dragon but have since switched to najdorf and other (arguably safer) variations because I had too many games where I found white's attack to be overwhelming. I found myself constantly on the defensive and found it difficult to start a queen side counterattack.

I think that overall, the dragon setup does a little too much to try to counterattack and requires black to play extremely accurately in order to defend the king and not get overwhelmed. Engines could probably defend with the dragon but I feel like white's simple and powerful attacking ideas are a lot for a human playing as black to deal with.

However, the dragon is by no means refuted. It just requires a lot of memorized theory and very accurate play.