who is better Kasparov or Fischer?

for all your Informations who's better kasparov or Fischer they are both Jews means gifted genius. Bobby Fischer made his on way by himself. review all Bobby Fischer games from start of his games to the very last in Reykjavik. get a chess board play all his games on the boards see the book written by svetozar gligoric all Bobby Fischer's games that time there is no computers aid. the deep understandings of Fischer's chess will make you crazy. gligoric made no anlyses on his book just all the games of Fischer. child to adult . while you playing all the games of this book you made your own thinking why he do this why he do that . when you done you will say Bobby Fischer is an extraordinary grandmaster exist on this planet. .GARRI KASPAROV not even close for that. thanks

Fisher best! He are a good and my favourite chess player! Who for Fisher?

KASPAROV

i don't think fischer is getting any better.  quite a challenge when one is dead.

so i guess kaspy by default.

Would have been great if the three-fischer lasparov and magnus met in 1950to 1970 period..lets see who wins with only pure talent..no computers..anyway magnus is the only one who got help from computers..anyway theyre the top 3 chess players mentioned as the GOAT of chess.fischer 1st .kaspy my close 2nd.magnus maybe top5... 

I would like to say Fischer, because he was of my generation. But in all honesty, it is too hard. These two were 1 and 2 and I cannot decide.

What do you mean fella? Magnus can do blind-folded chess against 3 players and play with 10 chess players even with a clock. Kasparov challenged very many chess computers but only lose to Deep Blue. Kasparov can't do blind-folded chess, but he sure can do deep and mind boggling chess games. 

Well kabayan you have a point there.it means he has a good memory.though his opponents are not grandmasters..but magnus vs top10 gms in the world or top 20 in classical chess.he didnt dominate them like fischer defeated 20gms in a row !or kasparov winning 10 tournaments in a row! I havent seen magnus doing that.and i dont think he can ever do it.its your analytical prowess that will make you beat super gms in real games! Thats what set fischer apart .coz at his peak he demolished everyone in his path like a tornado.thats why you ses the gap in the votes for fischer vs magnus.its not blindfold chess man.youre missing the point.its classical chess

dominance.just watch youtube documentaries on fischer.it explains why lots of people regard him as the GOAT..and he only became a world champ for a few months?it left the chess world at AWE ..like michael jordan...

people are even more amazed with caruana's 7game winning streak in tata steel 2016 or was it sinqfield.even with magnus in there..why didnt he do the winning streak and not caruana??

sorry it was sinquefield 2014..caruana finished first with 8.5 pts after scoring 7 out of 7 producing highest performance rating in chess history.magnus world champ since 2013 finished 5.5 pts.i dont see any dominance there...

Kasparov is better.

if a chess champ is really so good then people expect you to crush your opponents and super gms ..the top 10 in the world..convincingly in tournaments..not against computers and doing blindfold chess which should be so much easier for you since you can use your eyes to see the chess board and since youre fighting humans and not computers...i dont see him dominating the top 10 in the world coz he even loses to them in tournaments..

just wait kabayan coz our hero filipino weslwy so just beat him for the first time this year in classical chess in norway.who knows.monkey is off the back of wesley....

I think Fischer has the advantage due to him being older than Kasparov, thus having more years of experience, although age doesn't always decide the outcome. I think that if, by some paradox in the space-time continuum, they were to be the same age and play a game together, it would actually be quite difficult to decide. Kasparov is a decent tactician with solid offense and defense. He relies on an all-around positional style, but his plans can occasionally be thwarted by better players which causes him to become vulnerable. As for Fischer, his style is more aggressive. Attacking fiercely early on and occasionally making sacrifices, which are usually quite deadly. He is comparable to Rashid Nezhmetdinov, who similarly used to play in such a manner himself. This style of play is risky, however. A failed attack can allow the opponent to get the upper hand with a counterattack which weakens Fischer. His defense isn't too formidable either so he can get knocked down by a good enough attack.  In this situation, I'd leave it to personal choice. Solid play accompanied by tactical positioning as well as smart but sometimes exploitable planning versus a strong style of play accompanied by early, fierce, but risky aggression.

Agree man ..just dont know if fischer would adjust his attack if he sees a solid player like karpov or kaspy..anyways theyre my 2 goats anyway...

I think, Fisher is best.

Fisher!!!!

You guys are idiots.  The title says "who IS better" and was posted 22 days ago.

That makes the answer obvious.  Kasparov!

Any 800 rated clown on here IS also better than Fischer.  He's a dead man.

However, even if the question said WAS, it would still be Kasparov by a freaking landslide.

Even Karpov was better than Fischer and would have mopped Fischer off the floor in 1975 if Fischer hadn't been such a male body part and actually played.  A lot like someone else born only a couple of years later.  I wonder...did Fischer have orange skin?  LOL!