Classical Sicilian

I play the classical and the Rauzer is, well, playable. I play the old mainline with Be7/O-O. ... the classical is simply very good against anything that is not the Rauzer.

Yes, greater than many other Sicilians like Najdorf, Kan, or Taimanov because the main line often is opposite sides castling where a single tempo may be decisive.

More aggressive than the Najdorf. I often use it when playing for a win vs lower rated players. There’s few piece exchanges or symmetrical pawn structures. In the main lines, black gets the bishop pair and queen trades always favors black.

The classical sicilian (the Rauzer in particular, which is certainly white’s most pressing try) can get really sharp, complex, and sometimes irrational, but nonetheless seems relatively sound with lots of dynamic chances for both sides.

It's why I prefer the Classical Sicilian - sure I get a lot of Richter-Rauzers (which is similar to Yugoslav Attack style games), but I also get Boleslavsky Hole positions / Sozins / Dragons / Sveshnikovs / Big Central Pawn Mass positions. I'm not particularly great at any one of them, but I get to actually use a wider variety of chess skills in a typical game.

I am personally a big fan of the Classical Sicilian, I believe it is hugely underrated on Club level. Unless White goes Bg5 you are super flexible and can often choose between e6, e5 or g6 setups.

Classical Sicilian is good but Rauzer is pain and suffering

The difference of course being that you go a5 in one move, and instead of a6-a5 have the knight on c6. This is a significant improvement, especially because 10...a5 11.a4 Nb4! Prepares a very favorable version of the d5 break. I would say this line is sound for black.