Karpov
umm... but Karpov has won a world championship and has been world champion - both against Korchnoi (late 70's and 1981) and in 1993 against Jan Timman.
Karpov didnt win the title, he retained the the title that was given to him.
Karpov doesn't deserve this sort of permanent asterisk next to his name. It wasn't until the best player of all time arrived on the scene that Karpov had a serious rival. If one wants to diminish the accomplishments of former World Champions, there are much easier targets than Karpov....
I must agree that Karpov doesnt deserve the asterisk attached to him, however you are a little off the mark with the rest of your comment Roy. Karpov didnt have a serious rival because the greatest player of all time quit !
Take a look at: http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-players/fischer-mentally-disturbed-or-just-mean-spirited-jerk
I have another thread running regarding Fischer and our national/international obsession with him that you might want to investigate. But the idea that Fischer would have been a certain victor over Karpov is really fantasy. Maybe he would have won, maybe he wouldn't we'll never know, but the fact is that Fischer was either too, Crazy, Stubborn or just plain Chicken to play Karpov. So, give Karpov his just recognition. It's like a boxing match. If the fighter doesn't answer the bell, he looses. That's exactly what Fischer did, he failed to answer the challenge so screw him.
I hear 4 names most commonly mentioned in this regard:
1. Keres
2. Bronstein
3. Kortschnoj
4. Rubinstein
Anyone have any differing opinions?
I'd add Reshevsky to that list for sure, perhaps Bent Larsen too.