++Move order is rather important, and if you can avoid the Rossolimo, that's one less variation you don't have to learn. And if learning one less variation makes games even that much easier, why learn it if you don't have to?
++ I have decided that there is a small chance that you are illiterate. I quoted the original poster, explained my reasoning, and still you come after me about something that is simply incorrect.
Avoiding mainline theory got me from 1000 to 1500, stopped working, so I learned theory over the course of a few months, started playing longform theory and went from 1500 to ~1730 peak in literally two days. Meanwhile, an OTB friend of mine (+= OTB rapid and blitz record against me, similar time playing chess overall) only plays mainline theory and is hardstuck around 1100. I fully expect them to catch up to very quickly if they ever make it past 1400. I never recommend "avoiding theory" in the way that your post below does, as that is INCREDIBLY stupid. I recommend "avoiding theory" by not playing mainlines. For example, between like 900-1300, I would never recommend playing the Italian as White or 1... e5 non-Petrov's openings as Black because everybody plays the Fried Liver, and so a lot of players in that range know Knight Attack counterplay like Polerio, Traxler, or Ulvestaad. I played a match at 1100 blitz where we went 8 moves deep into Polerio Bishop Check Line Bogojubilov theory, but I didn't understand anything about the resulting position and lost in 15 moves. Meanwhile, once I realized everybody did the exact same thing, I started playing simple Petrov's, Alekhine's or Modern theory against 1. e4 (all of which I understood) and my ELO skyrocketed. Then, I switched back to playing mainline Italian, Scotch, and Spanish theory once I hit a plateau around 1500 and again, instant results. Mainline theory has its place, and that place is for players 1500 and higher, where half a point of material genuinely means something half the time and endgame conversions are inevitable.
Yeah, move order is important. That's why you play 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 g6
If you play 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 g6 3. d4 cxd4 then white has 4. Qxd4.
You avoided the Rossolimo but for what? Some people prefer this but there's literally no point in doing this. It's just a different line that you have to learn instead.
"Illiterate" omg dude. Pipe it down, I don't need your drama. Literally read the original post. Thread is titled "what's the best way to learn the sicilian as a 1100-1200 player?" NOT "should I play the sicilian?". You really had to get petty just because what I'm saying is completely true. (Waiting for your apology.)
Everyone should know the Fried Liver just like everyone should learn how to defend Scholar's Mate. This is super basic stuff. It's better to play Bc5 (Giuoco Piano) anyway. This is perfect to start out as you learn how to develop your pieces in an active, principled way. If you struggled to play against the Fried Liver then that's on your own play. If you enjoy the Petrov then go ahead but this is typically what higher level players play when they want a dry, positional game. It's like playing the Berlin Wall. It's better to play e5 Nc6 and learn some of the basic tactics and piece play of the game. If someone doesn't want to learn that then I don't know what to tell you because this is the most basic of the basic.
Your entire philosophy is "anti-learning". Your idea is that you shouldn't play something if you have to learn. Learning is all a part of the process.
Also you can't necessarily say that your friend is stuck BECAUSE they play main line theory. That's pretty much a confirmation bias. Of course there are other skills in chess than knowing lines.
A lot of people are not even going to know the deep theory anyway even in main lines. Maybe your opponent didn't know much more theory than you did and you just got outplayed. If you found a style which works for you then fair play but that style can't necessarily be recommended to others.
Not reading through 5 pages worth, so I'm sure my comments have been doubled by other people.
1) Play it. Hard to learn something without playing it and studying without playing is fool's gold.
2) At 1100-1200 you're unlikely to get deep theory in the open Sicilian so I would focus on a setup that can be reliably reached for most games and works decently against both kingside castling and queenside castling. The dragon is actually really good for this as the main problem of the dragon (the Yugoslav) is not going to be played or if it is, is not going to be played accurately at that level. Otherwise one of the French Sicilians (Taimanov-Kan) gives you the approach of trying to get an improved version of the French defense.
3) Learn ways to combat the intermediate friendly antis mainly the Alapin and Morra. These will be played against you and likely more accurately than someone attempting an open.
What you shouldn't do is memorize reams of open Sicilian theory that you won't play until significantly stronger.