@Paradise_Pete I noticed you don't play much here.
I didn't know that e5 is considered better than Sicilian today. I too don't play e5 because too much theory to learn. I like Sicilian because there are a lot of sharp lines but relatively manageable theory. But in truth the opponents I play, as well as myself, are not at the level to have a real classical Sicilian game. The classical game has white castling queenside and pawnstorming black, while black counterattacks on the queenside, typically with a rook sac against the knight on c6. In games I play, I never see that! Maybe 3% of white players castle queenside in the first place. I often play a trap in Sicilian bullet that is really unsound, but few know how to refute it. Bad habits....
I didn't know that e5 is considered better than Sicilian today. I too don't play e5 because too much theory to learn. I like Sicilian because there are a lot of sharp lines but relatively manageable theory. But in truth the opponents I play, as well as myself, are not at the level to have a real classical Sicilian game. The classical game has white castling queenside and pawnstorming black, while black counterattacks on the queenside, typically with a rook sac against the knight on c6. In games I play, I never see that! Maybe 3% of white players castle queenside in the first place. I often play a trap in Sicilian bullet that is really unsound, but few know how to refute it. Bad habits....