Is the Sicilian Defense good?

In fact the Sicilian Defense is the most popular and my favourite response to E4 as Black. Bots like Martin, Antonio and ChessGPT recgonize it. Also, I've seen a tier list that says C5 is the best response to E4. I've used the Sicilian to win lots of games and achieve an equal or good position: With the Sicilian your center pawns outnumber your opponent's, and there are lots of black pieces defending the center. It is also used by lots of top players and verified good by lots of YouTube channels. By moving C5, we create a large queenside pawn structure and give space for the queen's knight to move, without the C-pawn blocked. Lastly, the Sicilian gives many opportunities for Black. I like it so much that I wrote about it in a Christmas letter to someone who doesn't know about chess. 

 Oh, and by the way, the Sicilian prevents lots of good openings for White, such as Evans Gambit, Halloween Gambit, Ruy Lopez and more. 

I need an answer! An answer that will help me.

Sicilian is the most reputed opinion to exist in the world of chess. I've been a Caro player for long enough to realise that at higher levels, white can have better position in some variations. I'm eyeing to learn the Sicilian now

Actually, 1...e5 has already been proven to be the best response to 1.e4 from a theoretical standpoint. However, the symmetrical position makes it hard, especially for Black, to win. That is why 1...c5 is more often played, to create an unbalanced position. Practical results are best with 1...c5, but from a theoretical and soundness perspective, 1...e5 is the strongest.

And I say this UNBIASED! I play 1...e6 myself!

There is no single best response to 1. e4. Objectively, moves such as 1. c6, 1. c5, 1. e5, and 1.e6 are all equal. In the end, your choice of opening against 1. e4 depends on your personal preferences. If you prefer a tricky opening from a strategical perspective with logical plans and ideas on the rarer side, the Caro Kann could be the best opening against 1. e4 for you.

In the end, the Sicilian is one of my least favorite openings. It is simply painful to learn all the theory just to emerge in an equal position. White simply has too many moves and it's extremely difficult to prepare for all of white's options. Therefore, I would seriously recommend simpler alternatives such as 1. e5 to players below the Fide Master level, which allow you to allocate your time to improving other parts of your game.

By caricaturing :

a : a Jean-Yiannopoulos who says Sicilian Defense is bad openning, it's just because troll.

b : a Jean-Icke who says Sicilian Defense is bad openning, it's just because he's a follower of conspiracy theories who make misinformation.

No. The sicilian defense is a bad opening. It was made by some no-name player. No grandmasters ever played it, and those that did were just trolling and having fun, examples being bad players such as mikhail tal. The sicilian defense does not help develop a piece nor does it put a pawn in the center, so it must be bad. It puts you at a development disadvantage even more as black, so it must be bad. I'm not sure why anyone would play the sicilian defense. Yes, the sicilian defense is good.

yeah the sicilian is good

I play it exclusively against 1.e4. Never have to face Wayward Queen, Fried Liver or any gambit beyond 2.d4 or 2.f4. Just have to be aware of pet lines people have. It is a broad amount of theory, but it is just one response to 1.e4. Means that as black 2/3 of my games will be 1.e4 2.c5 with enough variety to not get board, but enough similarity to not get lost to often. Stop white getting 2 centre pawns, attack down the queen side. Development arms race. What is not to love?

ofc it is good and could lead to many imbalanced endgames, tactical and positional play, and fun games. The only downside is that you have to study a lot of responses for white and black (which is you, but you can study responses for white to use against the Sicilian.) But if you have the time, studying the Sicilian won't be hard.

It’s fine, I guess. Personally I prefer the much more aggressive 1… Na6!! Allowing White to throw away the bishop pair on move 2! Not only that, but the ensuing recapture gives Black a fantastic long diagonal and open file. Your queenside plays itself, and every good e4 opening requires the LSB to be played effectively, but now they don’t have that. If they decline, you can still play a weird Caro-Kann, French, Modern, or Hippo.

I can't tell if you are joking or actually being serious.

that's the point im pretty sure

Sure it is!

But what does that mean -- to say e5 is better from a theoretical perspective? With best play, it's ultimately a draw either way, don't you agree? If so -- if we're speaking merely theoretically and assuming absolutely best play -- then 1. ... e5 can't be better (or worse).

I'm trying to wrap my head around what you could mean by this, and I can't make it work. Practical differences I could understand, but that's exactly what you're bracketing out here.

I tend to research e4 positions in great detail, and Open Game and Sicilian are by far my two most researched, and from what I can tell, Black can effectively equalize almost instantly in the Open Game. The only two openings worth mentioning at all are the Ruy Lopez and the Italian.

The Berlin shuts down the Ruy Lopez, forcing either a Berlin Endgame, the ultra-passive d3 or Qe2, or the Four Knights Spanish, which is far worse than the Ruy Lopez and Italian. Black gets equality here pretty much on move 3, despite White retaining a decent advantage, the starting tempo and slight positional advantage mean less with 14 points of material off the board for both sides.

This leaves the Italian, where White can’t really take any sort of meaningful advantage into the middlegame due to how positional and closed the position becomes, as anything else has a refutation.

Meanwhile, in the Sicilian, Black actively accepts long-term weaknesses into the position, meaning that equality will not come until the middlegame, where counterplay will be developed in a multitude of sharp, double-edged positions. From a human perspective, this is fantastic, as the positions in Sicilians quickly become far too complex for human evaluation. With analysis, infinite time, or a strong enough computer, however, it’s clear to see that the Open Game equalizes faster, safer, and simpler.

All that's reasonable -- but it's about practical play, not ultimate theoretical evaluations.

It's good I guess

Yea!