Kasparov or Karpov

I like KASPAROV when he plays the Kings Indian Defense.

I like KARPOV when he play the Caro-Kann Defense.

As a person, I'd like to meet Karpov much more than Kasparov. As a player, Kasparov has always been my favorite

Karpov. The man is pure class. And although I have huge respect for Kasparov in chess, and personally, I think I'd rather hang out with Karpov if given the chance .

Here's a recent radio interview where they get along quite well, actually. It's really interesting (if you speak Russian). Karpov is cracking jokes half the time, and it's great!

http://www.echo.msk.ru/guests/3126/

I would prefer Kasparov for his amazing tactical ability. Nonetheless, Karpov was also a great player.

Between Kasparov and Karpov, I would say that after 180 games between them the difference in their score was insignificant... Kasparov would win  the match by merely 1 point or at least a draw. Still Kasparov was far much younger than Karpov: that would explain the difference in their score. Age matters in chess ...and after 180 difficult games between them age  simply caught up with karpov. Agree?There is no exception when Father Time Speaks! Had kasparov met the younger karpov i would surely bet for Karpov!  I think the  score in their first match provided the hint ! Through out the history of chess we saw eventually younger players winning over tired veteran world champions. Even Kasparov fell over the younger Kramnik! An exception is  Mikhail Botvinnik. He truly defied  Time when he won back the  World Chess Title over the stronger  and  much younger Tal !

I think in skill they are around equal- the difference being Kasparov is more long-term.

I think they played their matches when Karpov was at his best, but before Kasparov reached his best. The fourth of their five matches was played when Kasparov was 24 years old and Karpov 36, and the latter peaked around their five title matches according to Chessmetrics.

Kasparov had an Elo of 2700 when he won the title against Karpov, but fifteen years later he was 2850+ (and 36-37 years old). So the idea that time caught up with a declining Karpov in the 1980s is dubious, I'd say Kasparov's stats would have looked better if they had played each other when both were at their best. Karpov was an all time great though so Kasparov has nothing to be ashamed of with regards to winning their matches with small margins.

I'll take Lasker, for a change.

Karpov is my favourite player because although many of his games involve nursing minimal positional advantages to long wins in the endgame they are at least mostly understandable to sub master players. Kasparov was the first to heavily use computer analysis in his games and as a result some of his middlegame positions ended up looking like someone just randomly dropped the pieces on the board - total chaos which he controlled brilliantly with his phenomenal calculating ability but completely beyond the ability of club players to understand without deep annotations.

Unfortunately a lot of modern chess is now of the 'Kasparov' variety,I say 'unfortunately' because with engine analysis and the total dominance of tactics over old school positional judgement its hard to follow modern games through in a smooth beginning, middle and end storybook fashion like many of the classical games.

kasparov

Kasparov is my all-time favorite. But 1A is Karpov, who is just a hair behind him. Number 3 for me was Paul Keres.

Karpov's reign between 1975-1985 is very impressive. What is even more impressive is that Karpov actually managed to up his game between 1986-1996 in his pursuit of Kasparov. Karpov could have lived off his reputation but he worked even harder at improving his game after he lost the title.

Kasparov? Anyone who can be world champion for the guts of 20 years commands respect.

Kasparov gets my vote by a whisker

Kasparov was only slightly stronger.  That is why Karpov is the most underrated chess champion of all time!