who is better Kasparov or Fischer?

not comparable the two, might as well ask if carlsen is better than kasparov

Ya silly goose, death ain't no joke.

when fischer and kasparov play you'll have your answer

They never said at what. Maybe it's fishing. And Fischer has a good name for fishing. We don't even know which Kasparov or which Fischer

Despite the plethora of unserious answers here, I will wade in. Fischer obviously did not play very long, but he was the most dominant player of any recent era. He outrated all other players by the largest Elo margin ever, both absolutely and percentagewise. He was rated 2785 when #2 Spassky was 2660. 125 points, 4.7% higher. Neither Kasparov nor Carlsen ever achieved a 100-point lead over the #2 player.

In addition, no one has put together a 13-game winning streak against World Championship candidates (Taimanov, Larsen, Petrosian). His 19-game winning streak also included in the Palma Interzonal wins against 1971 Candidates Taimanov and Uhlmann, a win against former candidate Gligoric, and one vs. future candidate Mecking (plus Rubinetti and Suttles).

My opinion is that if you gave Fischer computers, current chess knowledge, and a bigger population of 2700 players to take points from (he was the only 2700 player of his era), he would still be the best. Ultimately, this is speculation, of course, since he, Kasparov, and Carlsen peaked at very different times.

Wow you know a lot NM fishface..learned something new about idol fisher...funny coz some americans like a 25yr old high rated uscf i played against before..he chose magnus.. i asked him if he researched about fischer..he said he knows about fischer ..but would choose others as the GOAT over fisher..glad you feel the same about the dominance of fischer and the incredible things that he did..surprised you do not go for carlsen or kasparov who comes 2nd for me..but i dont know your age..

Bobby Fischer did it all by himself.  He was a lone wolf, who lived near the poverty level for years.  Save for a brief period in his early teens -- when he would analyze with the older Bill Lombardy -- Fischer never had a mentor.

Kasparov was the last of the Soviet World Champions.  From the mid-70s until the fall of the Soviet Union in 1992, he had the support of a chess-machine that will never be seen again.  And by the time the Soviet Union had fallen, he had become the first Chess Millionaire and was able to hire his own array of "GM serfs," as well as have initial, exclusive access to Chess databases.  (Chessbase founder, Frederic Friedel has spoken of how he developed the early Chessbase versions to fit Kasparov's needs.)

yes the way he became all america champ as a kid  was impressive

We're doing your homework?

Ha!  Well the best argument for Kasparov is that he is the only world champion to hold the title over TWO eras of chess.  1) He was the LAST champion of the Soviet Chess Machine, that controlled the World Championship from 1948 - 1991, with the exception of 1972 - 1975. (Fischer)  Kasparov presided over the last 6 years of the Soviet hegonomy.  2) Kasparov was THE pioneer in utilizing chess databases and engines to attain (and his case, retain) excellence.

We have no idea how Fischer would have adapted to the computer engine era.  Karpov, who was 12 years older than Kasparov and 8 years younger than Fischer was unable to make the adjustment.  Maybe Kasparov's adaptability was due to his still being in his prime when chess databases and engines were being developed.  Or maybe it is because he was the greatest.

Wait,  this is for your daughter's project? 

Then what about this? 

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-players/who-is-better-karpov-or-fischer

So does she major in Karpov or Kasparov ?

Or are you just another kid posting for points? 

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/how-are-computers-so-good

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-players/why-do-people-always-have-to-win

Your topics and posts seem to suggest the latter.