Sicillian vs Caro-Kann

I'm not convinced that the "too much theory" thing with the Sicilian is that big of a deal. Obviously there is lots out there and it's probably quite a burden if you want to play the most theoretical variations at a high level, but at the fairly modest grades that I play at, I've not really come up against players who've gone anywhere near the critical stuff. In fact, a lot of them aren't even playing mainline anti-Sicilians, let alone sharp open variations, so it seems feasible to gradually pick up the theory just by trying to stay one step ahead of the sort of people who you play against. I suspect this might be true for the OP too?

I play Caro-cann and the Sicilian defense.+ Sicilian defense, an equal game in which there is no passivity.- You need to know a lot of theory.+ Caro-Kanna doesn't need to know much theory. - with a clear game of white, black gets a passive position.

@Diablosta Who says Black gets passive position? I always get good interesting positions from the Black side. True the Sicilian might actually be better at the highest level but at my (and the OP's) level Caro-kann is practically better. Whenever I play Sicilian, I always see my opponent blitzing out 10-15 moves of the opening and when I play Caro-Kann they are not booked up so much.

I do both and i like them both...with caro kann i always go for queen side castling and it is pretty much effective...and if you lile sacs im carokann you can change a knight for the 2 central pawns and positionnally you are very strong...thr only thing with carokann and queen castiling you need to pay attention to initial queen check becaise you have the open diagonal and with the knight os very dangeroua

I dont play the Caro Kann at all but it seems to result in more closed positions than the Sicilian so I would say decide on that factor mostly.

Caro kann is why I quit e4. Maybe try caro kann, it is really solid and you get great endgames.

One of my "pet" lines as black is the Nimzowitsch Defense (1 ... Nc6 in response to 1 e4). It's offbeat but definitely sound. The only problem is that white can go 2 Nf3 when black's good choices are kind of restricted to 2 e5 or a very risky Sccandi with 2 d5.

@Eleuthero The Nimzowitsch is definitely sound (as the computer likes it), but (in my point of view) is a little bit hard to play.

@Donaldsen

If white plays 2 d4 I play 2 ... e5 and hope that white pushes d5. Then I put my kicked knight on e7 then g6 and develop my king's knight to e7. This sets up a formation where black gets f5 in early but without shutting in his king's bishop. It does lead to unique positions that you don't see in any other opening so it does kind of stress out your pattern matching filters. Tony Miles used to play 1 ... Nc6 and 2 ... e5 but Nimzowitsch himself used to play 2 ... d5. So even in that one offbeat opening there are two major divergences starting at move 2. Then there's the problem of what to do if white doesn't play 2 d4 but chooses 2 Nf3. Then if black is too stubborn he often ends up with a bad Pirc or French. I only play it now and then to entertain myself because I get bored playing the same openings all the time so I shake it up.

@Eleuthero Very interesting! Worth a try
P.S. What if I play 4. d6 after 1. e4 Nc6 2. d4 e5 3. d5 Ne7? It seems like a system with a great win rate