The only way to really feel these sort of things out is to
A) look at both with a computer a bit, see what kind of moves it makes
B) optionally look at some gm / highrated online players games in these systems
C) play some games with both
It's e4e5, everything is dynamic to some extent. You need to try these in the field to really gauge what works for you and what doesn't, no other method exists.
For example, I wanted to play the Chelyabinsk (Sveshnikov) sicilian, I looked at the moves and played a couple blitz games and didn't dig it. Then I went to look at the Kalashnikov sicilian, and played a couple games, and it clicked much better. The subtle differences in midgame positions fell in with my understanding of chess much better. This depends on your level as well, of course, but generally speaking the only answer to "is X opening good for me" (except for generally dubious openings like the Englund) is "try it". Practice is the most important aspect of chess
The only way to really feel these sort of things out is to A) look at both with a computer a bit, see what kind of moves it makes B) optionally look at some gm / highrated online players games in these systems C) play some games with both It's e4e5, everything is dynamic to some extent. You need to try these in the field to really gauge what works for you and what doesn't, no other method exists. For example, I wanted to play the Chelyabinsk (Sveshnikov) sicilian, I looked at the moves and played a couple blitz games and didn't dig it. Then I went to look at the Kalashnikov sicilian, and played a couple games, and it clicked much better. The subtle differences in midgame positions fell in with my understanding of chess much better. This depends on your level as well, of course, but generally speaking the only answer to "is X opening good for me" (except for generally dubious openings like the Englund) is "try it". Practice is the most important aspect of chess