who is better Karpov or Fischer?
Sort:
I think Fischer.
It is not even a contest Fischer is better. Karpov wouldn’t have even gotten the title if Kasparov hadn’t retired.
Karpov was better at not ending up like Fischer :/
Yeah I so agree
Ha really you think Karpov is better?
He was the worst player I have ever seen.
He was the worst player I have ever seen.
Karpov perhaps, with his activity/longevity, but the debate rages on regarding who was stronger during the first half of Karpov’s reign.
I still think Fischer
Jul 30, 2018
0
#10
Fischer was a talented player for sure but maybe a poor sport and a perhaps spoilt egomaniac. He wouldn't defend he didn't deserve to keep the crown. In the end he was just a poor loser. Karpov's career is elegance and substantial in the history of the world of chess. many of Karpov's games are very beautiful and excellent, and there are a great deal of them. Fischer well he has a few that are really outstanding. I hated Fischer in those days, a disruption and a waste of time Better was watching the Englishmen and Dutch developing new theories and practices and contributing to Chess.
Much mire interesting.
Fischer not only was a great player he was responsible for a massive increase in the popularity of chess. Modern chess players have greatly benefited from his contributions both on and off the board.
Karpov was a great player but I think Fischer was even better.
Fischer did it all himself. No cheating Russian machinery backing him up at every stage. Look at the records. Fischer was great. Karpov was manufactured by the state. Fischer was the best of that era and handed the title to Karpov before going mad. What a pity. Fischer would have ruled chess for 20 years or more if he had not withdrawn into madness.
Write down below.