How is black ending better in the sicilian defense ?

People say that white has space and an attack but black has compensation in a better ending.

Why is that ?

Because of his static pluses. My friend once told me that almost any Sicilian ending is winning for black.

Unless he is material down, of course

Could you elaborate a bit on that? I also never really understood why White should be worse, and why Black's d-pawn is so much better than White's c-pawn.  Okay, his/her c pawn can become a potential target. On the other hand, White might get an outside passer. So why EXACTLY is Black better?

Black has a pawn minority on the Queenside, which can be used for a minority attack - that's what ...b5 is starting in many lines - to attack down the c-file. That's why the extra central pawn is so important. He also has less space, generally - a minus in the middlegame, perhaps, but a plus in an endgame (think Berlin main line and others - trades favour the side with less space). These two factors, especially the minority attack, give Black an advantage in almost any normal endgame.

That is, of course, assuming that we're talking about the Open Sicilian.

Um, no. it's that phase of the game that you're too much of a patzer to understand.

Excellent question. But can anybody supply a real game(s) to confirm that Black's endgame is superior in the Sicilian Defense? Or even the French Defense?

Pretty good. It looks like a reversed Pirc Defense, though. It would be nice also to see some Sicilian and French games that confirm what people claim about those openings is true.

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/game-showcase/pawn-power-in-chess

If you play the Sicilian for many years its easy question to answer; its the extra center pawn e6 , d6 to white only one e4, give black a slight edge in the endgame.

Thanks for the responses, but why exactly that extra pawns in the center are an advantage in the ending  ?

I know that in the French Defense Black often gets connected d- and e-pawns (a "pawn steamroller") if White does not play correctly, and I believe the d-pawn of that pair is often a passed pawn, so such pawns are very powerful since usually one will make it through to the "finish line." I don't quite understand yureesystem's description, but it sounds like Black's e-pawn gives Black a king-side pawn majority so that one of those pawns can sometimes get through to promote.

I'm still waiting for someone to supply another specific example, though.

(p. 182)
SICILIAN DEFENCE
(1 P-K4, P-QB4)

MENTIONED by Polerio in 1594, given its name by the Italian master
Greco in the seventeenth century, the Sicilian received its earliest
practical tests and a big boost in popularity in the MacDonnell-La
Bourdonnais match (1834), Staunton v. St. Amant match (1843), and
the great London Tournament of 1851. Since then it has experienced
repeated refutations and rehabilitations. But "age cannot wither nor
custom stale its infinite variety." Barely a year passes which does not
cause us to re-evaluate some variation. Today the defence is a regular
in every tournament, and one should refrain from 1 P-K4 unless
prepared to confront it.
The Sicilian owes most of its effectiveness to the semi-open Queen's
Bishop's file produced after White plays P-Q4 and the inevitable
exchange of pawns. With 1...P-QB4
Black immediately puts pressure on the Queen's
flanks and plans complete liberation with ...
P-Q4. The move also strikes at Q5 and
QN5, half opens a file and frees the Queen.
From the strategical point of view the Sicilian
has the advantage of allowing a large choice of
pawn-configurations. Moreover it avoids pre-
pared variations and certain drawing openings
like the Giuoco Piano and Four Knight's Game.
The dominant theme is struggle--in the opening,
in the middle-game--hardly suitable for those who wish to play for
a draw. The greatest danger is that White will get the upper hand
in the centre and then break through with a winning attack on the
King's side. By and large the end-game tends to favour Black since
White often weakens his position by early, ambitious King's-side pawn
advances.

(p. 145)
FRENCH DEFENCE
(1 P-K4, P-K3)

THE French derives its name from a correspondence game between
London and Paris in 1834, even though Lucena had examined it in 1497.
Variously disparaged over the years, it is nevertheless sensibly motivated
and one of the most important close [sic] openings. It lists among its
adherents Burn, Rubinstein, and Winawer, who
invented their own variations, Nimzowitsch,
Stahlberg, Steinitz, Czerniak, R. Byrne, Guimard,
Uhlmann, and its ultra-virtuoso Botvinnik. A
defence which offers scope for the imagination
and numerous subtle resources, it appeals to
rock-ribbed temperatments. French players are a
breed apart. They are willing to submit to cramp
and countless indignities in order to reach an
end-game where the pawn structure definitely
favours Black.

Evans, Larry, and Walter Korn. 1965. Modern Chess Openings, 10th Edition. New York: Pitman Publishing Corporation.

Countless indignities lol. 

I just found what might be good examples of Black having a winning pawn structure in such endgames:

()
https://www.365chess.com/view_game.php?g=2426156&m=26
Sicilian Defense wins due to better pawn structure

()
https://www.365chess.com/view_game.php?g=1189661&m=33
French Defense wins due to better pawn structure

I read it in Pawn Power  and other books and a very strong FM mention black normally has the advantage. I ask him why? He said because the extra center pawns e6 and d6 or  the dragon d6 and e7, with center pawns e6 and d6 it restricted white pieces and black can place his pieces better squares and after white attack fail he will have a lot structural damage and black can exploit  these weaknesses, the extra center for black allow a pass queen pawn, and for the dragon pawn structure white king side will have black color weakness and black king can pounce on these dark square weaknesses.

 The Sicilian game it was a structural damage because fail attack.

Now I got it, thank you !

The minority attack in the middlegame sets up the advantage for the endgame. This is caused by the extra central pawn. Quote from "Simple Chess (M.Stean)", a very good first book on positional play:

"Minority attacks derive from the Pawn structure, Pawn structures derive from the opening. Go back to the eras of Capablanca and Alekhine and you will see Queen's Gambits, hoards of them, with hoards of minority attacks descending from them. Nowadays [1978; still relevant] the Sicilian Defense is all the rage. Sicilians here, Sicilians there, Sicilians absolutely everywhere. Why this saturation with Sicilians? Does the Mafia's influence really extend this far? The answer lies in the minority attack. The whole idea of the Sicilian is for Black to trade his c Pawn for the d Pawn. White almost invariably obliges: 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 (or d6 or e6 or g6) 3.d4 cxd4, when Black immediately arrives at a minority attack Pawn structure. Half-open c file, extra central pawn, 2-3 minority on the Queenside; these are all the necessary ingredients. Sounds infallible, so where's the snag? Why doesn't Black win every game? The problem is of course that White has a lead in development in the early stages, which may prove difficult to survive. Black's prospects lie later in the game when the winds of White's initiative have blown themselves out."

The structural weaknesses White accepts because he is trying to avoid Black's plan to launch a minority attack to get a winning endgame and must attack. They are not the cause of Black having winning endgames (otherwise White wouldn't weaken his position in such a way); merely they are a symptom of him having to attack the Black King. The root cause of this is the minority attack, and this is why most Sicilian endgames are winning for him. The minority attack is also a theme in any Rook endgames, so it's not just a late middlegame idea.

Wow!!

Great explanation, I really like stean's book.