idk i only play italian
Which is better? Caro-Kann or Sicillian?
Sort:
Leetsak wrote:
caro kann is very passive and defensive, if you are one of those players who just sits and defends and waits for opponent to blunder while trying to dislodge your defense, go for the boring caro kann, sicilian is very double edged, you will get a very interesting positions but chances to lose a very high, e5 is just boring theory even more so than caro kann, alternatively you can actually play modern defense and indian game after e4 as well, pirc is pretty good as well but is somewhat weak
i love watching 900s talk about openings like they know anything at all, very humorous
The move 1…c5 doesn’t develop a piece.
Black development is behind.
White side players can do a lot of Blitzing Attacks.
None of the Blitzing Attacks are considered good, but doesn’t matter.
White side players will do it anyway and they will collect some wins by doing it.
I don’t recommend playing these lines as beginner.
You are putting yourself in a Defensive position when Attacking is easier to do vs. Defending.
Anyway, It doesn’t matter.
I tell people not to play the Sicilian because it’s to advanced for them.
Than they do it anyway to try prove me wrong.
At the end of the day, you should just do what makes you happy.
Jan 11, 2025
0
#50
I just want a exciting opening not anything boring like Sicillian or Caro-Kann
Jan 11, 2025
0
#52
If you expect excitement from every single game, you will be noob forever. Very often you just need to win very boring way.
Jan 14, 2025
0
#53
I say this as someone who has played both defenses a lot and as someone who made the Caro their primary e-pawn defense for a long time, but I think the Sicilian is (probably) objectively better. The reason has to do with the 2 versus 1 central pawn majority the Sicilian gives black (in the Open Sicilian). This is a fundamental imbalance/asset black is able to work with, and there's no equivalent to it in the Caro (where it's usually either a closed center with white having extra space or a 1 versus 1 "half center" with white having a d4 pawn and black having an e6 pawn.)
Practically speaking, the Caro works well. The practitioner gets to know it better than his opponents, who only see's it in, maybe, one out of eight or ten games as white against their e-pawn opening.
So, it may boil down to whether you want to play chess where you're depending on your opponent to be a little inaccurate to give you room to shine or whether you want to play the gold standard but have them be better prepared for you.
Mittens742689 wrote:
#54 Most of the people posting here are about 900 with no deeper understanding of chess openings nor are qualified to talk about the Caro kann, as their statements are untruthful. In the Caro-Kann black aims for quick development towards white's king with moves like bg5,Qc7,ng5,nf6,h5, to attack white's king, it's a aggresive opening and's only boring and slow if you get the exhange variation. The main plan of white is c3,Qf2,nc3,be3,O-O-O. To avoid black's kingside attack they should castle queenside, altough many players at your level'll be unaware of such.
You have it reversed.
White is often the one doing a Kingside attack
Jan 15, 2025
0
#55
Mittens742689 wrote:
#61 Both openings are +0.2 for white and are basically equally good.
Funny you should mention this. After I posted yesterday I decided to let Stockfish run all night to see what a modern NN engine would say. It does indeed put them close, Sicilian +0.24 versus Caro +0.28.
I caution using such numbers as the final word though. Engines are very depth sensitive and one ply could change that eval dramatically. Also, along the way, the eval shifted many times. At times it had the Sicilian much better, at times it had the Caro slightly better, and at times it had 1...Nc6 better than either! (the last one not at a trivial depth either.)
Lent_Barsen wrote:
Mittens742689 wrote:
#61 Both openings are +0.2 for white and are basically equally good.
Funny you should mention this. After I posted yesterday I decided to let Stockfish run all night to see what a modern NN engine would say. It does indeed put them close, Sicilian +0.24 versus Caro +0.28.
I caution using such numbers as the final word though. Engines are very depth sensitive and one ply could change that eval dramatically. Also, along the way, the eval shifted many times. At times it had the Sicilian much better, at times it had the Caro slightly better, and at times it had 1...Nc6 better than either! (the last one not at a trivial depth either.)
Today's engines are extremely far away from correctly evaluating openings. Maybe an engine in 100 years time that's a billion times stronger will be useful in that regard, but probably even that will be too weak.
borovicka75 wrote:
67#: Yes, 1400 player is surely competent to criticize 4000 ebgine.
As a matter of fact, most if not all 2200s also agree with the 1400's statement 
Lent_Barsen wrote:
Funny you should mention this. After I posted yesterday I decided to let Stockfish run all night to see what a modern NN engine would say. It does indeed put them close, Sicilian +0.24 versus Caro +0.28.
I caution using such numbers as the final word though. Engines are very depth sensitive and one ply could change that eval dramatically. Also, along the way, the eval shifted many times. At times it had the Sicilian much better, at times it had the Caro slightly better, and at times it had 1...Nc6 better than either! (the last one not at a trivial depth either.)
A fun experiment, but even if we were to analyze 10 moves deep in any direction, I usually ignore any engine eval that's less than 0.7.
Even if the engine declares one position is -0.6 and the other is +0.6, they're both still firmly in the practical realm of "draw". (Meaning, from a human perspective, anything within that range is completely playable.)
Beginners need tactics. Nothing develops these faster than meeting 1.e4 with 1…e5, but the Sicilian does almost as well.