Which has more theory to Learn for Black: Classical e5 or Sicilian?

It's not about fairness but choosing what you do best. Some have a keen eye for tactics while others are better at predicting how a position will evolve.

Thing is, to win a game you need to develop activity at some point. Most Sicilians systems are about getting counterplay (activity) faster than what you may get in a 1.e4 e5, but it is not that Black doesn't develop activity in 1.e4 e5 games, it's just that it –often– comes later after some serious preparation. Now, knowing where to aim for and how to requires more understanding than deciphering a tactical hit in a critical line. That's why it takes more time. On the bright side, after making that work you'll be able to spot your rivals inaccuracies and mistakes several moves before they even notice they're in troubles.

Yet the same kind of delayed activity can be found in several Sicilian systems. You can get very good results playing the Sicilian Kan Hedgehog, for example, if you're willing to do the work to understand it.

Hey SeniorPatzer! We played a 45+45 game once! I’m asking myself the same question. I bounce around openings too much and have played mostly the French, 1...e5, and the Sveshnikov Sicilian. The truth is everything depends on how far you want to go and what kind of chess player you want to be. I score the best playing the French by a significant margin, but does that mean I “should” play it? I play too much blitz and having the same French structure is very promising, and often times people just drop pawns in the opening and I get a very good French. However when I’ve been tested in the main lines I haven’t always done the best and I find playing with the cramped position all the time unpleasant. With the Sveshnikov, my results are okay but playing such an anti-positional opening is uncomfortable and I mostly do well when people fail to play 6.Ndb5. It happens a lot and makes the Sveshnikov very practical for club players, but then again so is the O’Kelly as lots of people play 3.d4. 1...e5 is definitely a bit of work and the main lines of the Italian with d3 and a4 are definitely passive for black, but in longer games I feel like I get what’s going on and can absorb more from reviewing my games, whereas in my Sveshnikov and sharp French games I end up a bit confused to be honest.

TL;DR I think for my own chess culture I should stop the blitz and play 1...e5. I highly recommend FM Yuri Krykun’s course on Chessable “Unleash the Bull 1...e5”

 

Hi Connor!  I do remember playing you.   I'm pretty sure I lost, lol.  

 

Why did you like Krykun's course over Gustafsson's course?

It depends on how you want to use it. If you want a reference with the absolute critical lines definitely go for Jan’s course. If you’re looking for a very practical repertoire with 1...e5 to actually go through and learn definitely go for Unleash the Bull. Jan’s course has 1312 trainable lines and FM Krykun’s course has 267 trainable lines and contains two different defenses to the Ruy Lopez. Basically Jan’s course is aimed at masters and Krykun’s is aimed at club players. Jan doesn’t even recommend using the spaced repetition he recommends using it mainly as a reference. Jan’s course is stronger but for me Krykun’s was exactly what I was looking for. You can even try both and return one within thirty days. That’s what I would recommend doing.

Both are the main GM play, with the occasional caro or French defence. Both require a crapload of study to get competent playing. As a Sicilian guy, best idea would be to learn Kan and taimanov style, e6 positions... as well as being a little safer and easier to learn, both are played at super GM level. Scheveningen... compact, counter punch style. Play with an early a6 to avoid the Keres. For gawds sake do not go near the Dragon or Nadjorf until you get at least expert level? Some variations have been analyzed to about move 30... and even GMs can mess the lines. Good luck.

I believe a player's choice depends on one's personality. I like exciting games. I don't care if I lose an exciting game. So Sicilian Najdorf is my clear choice. I do know I have to study sidelines like 2. c3 and 3. Bb5 (Bc4)

Some people think e5 is a lot of theory. I don't believe so, at least when compared to the sicilian UNLESS you play 2...Nc6

I always play the Petrov's and have found very easy ways to simplify theory learning.

However, if you REALLY want to learn no theory, do the Scandinavian.

I know what you're thinking, the Scandinavian is sketchy. But the modern variation is really, really solid and gives black winning chances. It's what I use against players when I'm looking for a win.

 

@MatthewFreitag, just because amateurs don’t know theory doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

Yes. Petrov, Scandi, French, Philidor etc. Any of such are fine at club level. Most of the decision up to individual preference... I played Sicilian since very young, so anything else feels very strange. 

Follow your gut!

Try to see which openings (both with White and Black) give you a good feeling; which ones you feel more comfortable with. Then study GM games played with those.....take notes, and try to understand the main ideas of those openings......

Best of luck in your journey.

You might want to check this out....

https://www.chess.com/blog/2Bf41-0/a-training-guide-to-steady-chess-improvement?alert=content

I reckon there is a lot more theory for Sicilian than e5. But there are a lot more openings you can get to from e5. If you are an attacking player I would recommend you play Sicilian. It is an attacking opening that imbalances the game immediately. They both have a lot of theory. But e5 is a looser opening.

Not much of a professional here, but I love studying openings. I played e5 when I was beginer. After 5 or more years i turned to c5. It was harder at first, but learning its ideas are way more satisfying and I really get a feel that I am the one in charge. Lately ive tries c6 but not for long as it is very painful if white knows what he is doing.
Some world champion said that everyone has to know 1.e4 e5 to become world champ just because it gives so much understanding of positional play. Therefore at the moment I am learning Ruy Lopez as white and afterwards will try e5 as black. So far Ruy is mindblowing even if i have not even finished first chapter exchange variation.

Dear Chessfriend,

My name is Gabor Balazs. I am a Hungarian FM, fighting for the IM title. My top ELO is 2435. I have been playing chess for 21 years. I won the Hungarian Rapid Championship twice (U16 and U18).

I love teaching chess and it is very important for me that both of us enjoy the lessons beside the hard work. I have pupils almost all the levels from beginners to advanced players (1100-2200 ELO).

Why should you choose me?

- I have a widespread opening repertoire (a lot of openings are analysed by strong Grand Masters).

- I have a lot of chess books in PDF and Chessbase format, so I can teach you the main middlegame plans, the art of calculations, famous chess games and the endgame theory.

- I have elaborated, personalized training plans, which help you to improve your skills effectively.

- I help you analyse your games deeply, so you can realise your mistakes and learn from them.

- I am really flexible and hard-working person, the quality of my work is really important for me.

Please, contact me (balazsgabor1991@gmail.com), if you are interested in working with me, I am looking forward to your message. 

How should I know

In general Sicilian has more theorie to learn because of enormous number of variations,

Sounds good

The sicilian is a lot more flexible though in general, it tends to follow the same general game plan and high quality moves can very often be found over the board. The double king pawn opening meanwhile forces you to be familiar with all kinds of different openings from the Scotch to the King's Gambit to the Guioco Piano and of course the Spanish Torture - the Ruy Lopez. 

I think the Sicilian just got a reputation for needing to know a lot of theory for due to specific sharp lines or stupid people learning reams of variations to try to force the dragon to still work against white's common sense moves.   

Don't believe everything you read.

The Sicilian starts on move one. The Spanish starts on move three. If you were to compare apples to apples, it would be the Sicilian vs 1.e4 e5. Or the Open Sicilian vs the Spanish.

The theory on both 1.e4 e5 and the Sicilian is massive. 

My six volumes of ECO covers the Sicilian in 212 pages and the Open Sicilian in under 144 pages. It covers 1.e4 e5 in 367 pages. It covers the Spanish in 210 pages. 

Since black is the one choosing which sicilian to play in 3.d4 lines, you can't really count most of sicilian theory.

In any case as others have said or hinted at, "which has more theory" isn't a useful question to ask.