English/Sicilian

Do these two have enough (any) similarities that if I played both, there would be some advantage in knowing familiar positions?

I'm searching for "families" of Openings that might reduce my learning curve.

Thanks.

Yes, comparisons between the English and Sicilian are useful.  You would need to look at the variation 1 c4 e5.  In a general sense, the formations are often similar and the pieces often behave in the same way.  The English can go 1 c4 e5 2 Nc3 Nf6 3 Nf3 Nc6 4 g3 d5 5 cxd5 Nxd5 6 Bg2, which is reminiscent of the Dragon Sicilian.  However, analogies are not a substitute for calculation.  It is important to learn when an idea from one cannot be applied to the other.

The English and the Sicilian actually blend together in the Accelerated Dragon Maroczy Bind 1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 g6 5 c4.

Some analogous lines are the Gambits, Vector in the English and Morra in the Sicilian.  The Vector Gambit is 1 c4 d5 2 cxd5 c6 3 dxc6 Nxc6 4 Nc3 e5.  The Morra Gambit is 1 e4 c5 2 d4 cxd4 3 c3 dxc3 4 Nxc3.

pfren, do you mean that there are no similarities worth talking about excluding the Reversed Sicilian, or that even the Reversed Sicilian is not similar in any significant way because of the extra tempo and the different lines that result?

a book worth looking at, which elaborates the issues mentioned by pfren is Volume 3 of John Watson's "Mastering the Chess Openings". He discusses a variety of reversed Sicilians and concludes his discussion by noting why it is palatable for black to be a tempo down in a reversed Sicilian.

On a meta-scale, the whole issue of reversed openings and the extra tempo is also discussed in the series by Watson, Suba et al. The intriguing thing is that extra tempo isn't the boon one might think it is at first! (A case of information, you'll find.)

@JFK-Ramsey

if you are looking for a family of openings to cut down on learning time, I could suggest you play openings which lead to the Hedgehog structure. These are mostly black responses and typical black openings which can give rise to the Hedgehog are: Kan Sicilian; Nimzo and Queen's Indian; the Symmetrical English.

The great news is Sergei Shipov has written two amazing books, published recently, covering the entire Hedgehog set up. His target audience is probably 2000+ ELO. The books cover the historical development of the structure, cover notable games and combine a lovely mixture of variations and verbal explanation.

Besides, any book which has a picture of a real hedgehog wearing a nisse hat in the introduction has got to be good.

Andrew Soltis in his book "Pawn structure chess" examines English and Sicilian at the same chapthers(p.66 "The Open Sicilian- English" and p.308 "The closed Sicilian- English").Also Donaldson (I think , I can't find the book right now) gives examples from Closed Sicilian to explain the plans for English.

Yes , they have a lot of differencies but they certainly have a lot of similarities as other openings also(Stonewall for example is mostly the same either with white or black).

Certainly gaining a familiarisation with English will help with Sicilian and vice versa just don't expect that there are no differencies.   

edit: Found the book , it's "A strategic Opening Repertoire" by Jon Donaldson and Carsten Hansen

I'm not an expert on either opening, but since white is playing to force an advantage and black is playing to equalize, there must be some major differences on a strategic level.

Hasn't white played the opening exactly as a reversed Dragon in both cases?

I don't understand why you find hard to believe that same pawn structures have same plans?

Isn't "Minority attack" the same if white launces it on Queen's Gambit declined or Black launches it on Caro Kan exchange ?

Isn't isolated pawn the same no matter who has it?

Yes , the first move makes things significantly different (it couldn't be any other way) but to  what point?Lines are different , middlegame is the same or very similar. 

 OP isn't looking for something that is the same with white and black.That can't happen.He is looking for something that will help him reduce his opening study without reducing his efficiency.The choice of English -Sicilian  is a clever choice.

Pawn structure isn't the only thing that determines good strategy, there are a lot of other factors in the mix. In your typical Sicilians, black is trying to mix things up and get a sharp position with roughly equal chances for both sides - i.e. to negate white's first move advantage in an aggressive fashion.

So yes, you can do this as white as well if you like in the English - if you're content with having a level position with white. If however, you want to play for an opening advantage as white, play the English as the English, not as the Sicilian.

(Disclaimer - I don't play either opening, I am a d4 player and play and the French against 1. e4. So it's possible I am talking rubbish. But this is what my "chess brain" tells me.)

You certainly aren't talking rubbish but.......playing for an opening advantage is not that critical for us.Playing a position we understand is much more important (I think).Even Aronian admits that the Bf4 line he plays in QGD doesn't offer white any objective opening advantage.A lot of Grandmasters , even World Champions have chosen to play lines that don't give any opening advantage , why can't we do it?

In any case it's a matter of priorities.Some like to play the cutting edge of opening theory others prefer lines based on understanding.It's just 2 ways of dealing with the same problem.  

I think it's ok to have such openings in your collection - I play the London System occasionally - but I don't think you should rely on them. You should also have some openings which aim for an advantage, otherwise you may as well play black in every game.