Is playing the Caro Kann good at high level?

Yes thanks for the advice. At the time I created this post I was only playing Caro Kann, but since a month ago I’ve been playing Sicilian 2.Nc6 and I like the positions I get more. (This is on my main account) 

But I can’t seem to find any books for playing against the Rossolimo for some reason? All the books seem to be for white.

Watch this :

https://youtu.be/quKiHcXs8SA

That's how it's done by Mikhail Demidov 

https://ratings.fide.com/profile/4197143

I would say stay with Caro Kann , don't go in to the Sicilian unless you want to get slaughtered by strong players. 

The Caro-Kann can be played at all levels.

Even at the engine level (far beyond the scope of even the strongest humans), the Caro-Kann still holds.

Thanks for the advice but I find that the sicilian Nc6 suits me well, and with Caro Kann I would always struggle against higher rated players because it’s slightly easier to play against Caro. Lately I’ve been analysing lots of master games of Sicilian Rossilimo and Paulson and for me those positions are more comfortable to play than the repetitive Caro exchange variation I always used to get which is a bit drawish.

go for the nadarof of dragon sicilain and study the roselimo by using the anaylis on chess.com ps. sorry for my spelling

I play the nc6 Sicilian too and the Rossolimo is the bane of my existence. I think I'll probably start playing g6+bg7 after bb5 because I just can't find myself in good positions in the other main lines

Capablanca, Botvinnik and Karpov all used the Caro-Kann in important matches. If the opening is unsound, then those three top-level GMs don't seem to be aware of it.

I don't think what other people think but I think playing 1 opening isn't worse than playing 100 openings.If you play an Caro Kann so good,I don't think you need another.Because as you played it for a long time,you know what to play for each move your opponent can do.So even if your opponents prepare for Caro Kann,I don't think that matters much.

 I saw your profile page, how much do you charge?

True.

Carlsen also played it in his World Championship match against Anand.

That match was Carlsen's first ever attempt at winning the World Championship. He wouldn't have chosen the Caro-Kann, in the highest-stakes match of his life at that point, if he'd thought it was a dubious defense.

But I mean it’s so easy for white if he just plays the exchange variation, when I played Caro it was always a bit hard trying to create a win out of such an equal position against lower rated opponents too.

You put it like white is always ok with a draw, while black must fight for a win.

Well I’ve been getting really good results and amazing games with 2.Nc6 Sicilian lately and I’m feeling comfortable with the pawn structure and piece placement. It suits me better than Caro Kann because I would struggle more

Well, I stick to Petrov but I suppose at your level one must have a wider repertoire, depending on circumstances. I guess if white is forced to win, for example, he could find the CK more annoying. That's why Kasparov chose c4 instead of e4 against Karpov in the last game of their 1987 WC match.

Yes I guess if you want to be more dynamic, Sicilian is better but if you prefer positions less riskier and quieter  then Caro Kann 

I used to play Petroff when I was less experienced but I immediately stopped because when white knows what to do against it it doesn’t work as well 

Fortunately I rarely come across people who know what they are doing.

You can't prove one movie is better than another also, that doesn't mean you can't have an opinion on it. Yes if you solve the game and assume perfect play they are both objectively equal but we're not talking about solving the game or assuming perfect play. We are talking about what will actually happen, how things will turn out, and maybe a little about how pleasant an opening is to play (which tends to help players be in a good mood and play it well). If you open a chess book and for every line it says they both objectively draw therefore you can't say one is better than another would you consider it a good book? If an expert says something - eg. the king's gambit isn't a strong opening, while it may be true at the highest levels it may be the exact opposite at lower ones. In a way computer evaluations have made this problem worse, by giving people numbers they seem to think there is some ultimate objective "truth" about how good or bad a position is. This idea that e5, c5, c6 and e6 are all "equal" and others are less "good" may be a useful rule of thumb for the situation in grandmaster chess, but shouldn't be taken literally. There is also the point that when an opening is played infrequently, its "surprise" value increases, which is why it may be chosen again and occupy a certain modest niche. Just because Carlsen played it once in an important match doesn't mean it's good as your main defence. Just because Karpov used it as a main weapon in the 1980s doesn't mean it's still good today - while 1500 players making efforts to keep up with the "latest lines" every few weeks are delusional, I'm pretty sure actual strong players have learned lots of useful information since the 1980s and some openings from then are now unplayable.       

Honestly, I'm kind of considering writing a book about people's misunderstandings of openings in chess, and also people's misunderstanding of chess engines - which can border on the farcical sometimes - because it runs really deep among otherwise very intelligent people even if they have been playing chess for a long time. In fairness it can be kind of strange to get your head around so it warrants a proper explanation that is missing from most chess books.  

I think every defense has an annoying variation (or two) where White can pursue aggressive simplifications, for sure.

Sometimes, though, even in simplified positions, the resources are still there. They're just sometimes harder to find.

Here's Caruana using the Caro-Kann to pick apart Aronian, after Aronian went for the exchange variation (just as an example of one way Black can squeeze some dynamism from that variation):

That’s because white went after the b3 pawn. Never in my games has anyone played the variation that Aronian played