Why Don't the Pros Castle King Side Against Sicilian Defense?

Below is a very common opening sequence against the Sicilian Defense in my sub-1200 games online:

This is not a mistake, and there is no way to exploit it. Just because the closed has not had a master level proponent since Spassky doesn't make it a bad opening. It's all just fashion. Even in the open variations you see kingside castling pretty regularly. The fashion of castling long and launching a kingside attack I think is more due to the exciting nature of the games than its objective strength. Also, the more classical variations may have gotten played out a little.

Another point is that modern masters are all at least a little bit 'scientific attackers' and probably look more for openings that let them out-calculate their opponents rather than openings that are very positionally solid.

There is a big difference between the open sicilian and any kind of closed sicilian. In the open sicilian, white is trying to use his big lead in development to quickly attack black, before black would have the possibility to catch up in development and then use his center pawn majority. Therefore, white often castles queenside because white knows that his attack should be faster. (English attack/Yugoslav attack type of setups, or the najdorf main line) There is nothing wrong with king side castling, it is just not so ambitious. Black can equalize easily. Of course castling queen side is not good against the kan/taimanov therefore white castles king side.

There is no way to exploit the position you show, white did not do anything wrong, but the position will be equal. It is a good achievement as black. And anyway at your level openings don't matter, you will win/lose the game by either hanging pieces or by 2 move tactics.

They do. Depends which Sicilian.

I think ur refering to the open sicilian. Well if you are, the reason the vast majority of pro's do that, is because if 0-0 against open sicilian, there is slightly lower pressure than 0-0-0. But some do castle short, a few though. 0-0-0 for white usually means a win at all costs, expecting white to play sacrifises etc.

And I believe Siegbert Tarrash's qoute, "...a sicilian is bound to lose against a strong opponent!"

chessmicky wrote:

"Of course this isn't a real Closed Sicilian, other wise White's white-squared bishop woud be on g2, not c4."

The bishop can be on c4 in the closed Sicilian. g2-g3 and Bg2 is the main line of the closed, but there are other lines. 2.Nc3 is really what defines the closed. The game can transpose to an open with an early Nf3/Nge2 and d2-d4 but this requires black's cooperation. Players that want to play d2-d4 in one move usually play Nf3 before Nc3, for a number of reasons. The first that comes to mind is to be able to play the Maroczy bind against the accelerated dragon.

chessmicky wrote:

This is just a solid, unambitious setup by White .

csalami10 wrote:

There is nothing wrong with king side castling, it is just not so ambitious. Black can equalize easily.

Don't let these guys dissuade you from playing the closed Sicilian, or the classical variations of the dragon, Scheveningen, etc. These lines are not nearly as anemic as they have made out and saying that black can equalize easily is going a bit far. They may not give white as good of a chance for an advantage with accurate play by black, but they have plenty of bite against the unwary combatant. Besides, the argument that the open lines with a quick kingside pawn storm are objectively stronger than a more classical approach could be debated. Moreover, they are very positionally solid and I think a beginner would do well to spend some time experimenting with these lines. My advice would be to play some games with these lines and check out some master games to gain a healthy respect for the variations, even if you end up always meeting the dragon with the Yugoslav.

Nothing wrong with this, perfectly playable. In this line white must focus the attack on the kingside, while black will attack on the queenside.

In the position you show white has a small lead in development and just slightly the more active pieces.  In those circumstances a slightly old fashioned player (such as me) might be concentrating, as black, on trying to equalise. What is certainly true is that white has made no clear error. That being so it is one of the well established opening principles that black should not be thinking about attacking until s/he has completed their development. No doubt a wonderfully astute person with an excellent grasp of the themes and ideas of the Sicilian could still "punish" white, not by embarking on a premature attack but rather by placing their pieces on the best squares. And that is the simple objective you would do well to adopt.

Incidentally, running this particular sequence of moves through on a database choosing always the most popular moves reaches a position at move 8 where white has a marked preponderance of wins in virtually all lines. So, in practical play, it is difficult to think that white's choices have been at all bad. Possibly the reverse.