Fischer was a one-hit-wonder..!

At least I agree on comparing games against Petrosian. Karpov and Petrosian's styles were very similar (positional play). There it's much more difficult to win games.

Fischer and Kasparov also had similar play. Both liked active play and knew very well how to use initiative!

Euwe wrote: "FISCHER liked lively positions."
(Source: From Steinitz to Fischer, Chess Informant 1976.)

Unfortunately we don't have those characteristics from Euwe for Karpov and Kasparov. 

"In June, 1974, the FIDE Congress in Nice approved the 10-win regulation and the elimination of draws from the scoring, but imposed a 36-game limit and rejected the 9-9 proposal. On June 27, 1974, Fischer sent a telegram from Pasadena, California to the FIDE Congress:

As I made clear in my telegram to the FIDE delegates, the match conditions I proposed were non-negotiable ... FIDE has decided against my participation in the 1975 World Chess Championship. I therefore resign my FIDE World Championship title.

--- Source http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.pl?tid=54487

Fischer was the greatest chess trail blazer of all time and we owe him great respect regardless of his personal foibles

yes and awesome pic you have in your profil

Karpov was no match for Fischer at all.. just listen to GMs timann said that Fischer was way superior. Korchnoi said back then : there is no dount that FIscher is the strongest player who ever lived.

Its obvious Karpov wouldnt even had the slightest chance against Fischer.

 Ahahaha, that is the biggest joke in a while. Fischer is no match for Karpov's achievements. He hurt the game so much when he refused to play Karpov. I mean, he was afraid and he knew Karpov was much better than Spassky whom Fischer barely managed to beat not by chess means but with the help of dirty tricks out of the board. However, he chickened out and the chess world missed this great match that would have been. Not only Fischer has never been the best but he also hurt the game with his foolish behaviour...

First of all Fischer did the most for the game, he added an extra touch of myth and legend to the game.

Second Karpov only played Spasski after Fischer broke him. But besides who cares about Spasski, FIscher was anyway way better then Karpov. Karpov had no chance against Fischer. Karpov also didnt look to good against Korchnoi and Korchnoi said: there can be no doubt FIscher is the strongest player who ever lived!!!!

at least back then he said it.

also because of Fischer chessplayers can live from chess, it probably wouldnt be possible without Fischer, or at least the payment would be really really small.

lol we all know Fischer is the best.

Karpov was much stronger than Spassky. Moreover, take a look at this:http://www.chessgames.com/perl/ezsearch.pl?search=Fischer-Korchnoi

Even record against a much less stronger Korchnoi. Karpov did better against Korchnoi in his peak.

Moreover, Kasparov has commented that in the 90s he reached levels Fischer would have never been able to reach, just because he was much older and would have been in his 50s by then. The Kasparov of the 90s was much stronger than any Chess player of the 70s.

In terms of raw talent, probably Fischer was the best, but Kasparov reached much higher levels of proficiency.

Fischer would probably have beaten Karpov in 1975, as Karpov himself has comented "Fischer was probaly a stronger player than me in 1975". He also stated that he would have become stronger than ever from that match, and as a result, Kasparov would have become even stronger to face up to the challenge. Fischer would have lost against Kasparov , that is for sure, just because he was much older.

he was the best up to 1972. 

Bobby was the ultimate coward - winning the world championship then running off to hide.  

Basically he was too scared to put his ego on the line.  Hence he was a coward.  He was also arguably stingy and selfish

Nakumura and Tal are the opposite, brave and fearless they  play anyone anytime and do not hesitate to rematch.  

Fischer won the match 12½–8½ despite the fact that Spassky had two clear points lead in the start of the match (in second game Fischer forfeits).

T-misha77 shows very poor taste in denigrating Fischer. He is entitled to his opinion but it smacks of ignorance

you must understand the world in which Fischer entered, his mind was involved in things far from the mundane, chess became something of little importance.

If you want to ignorantly beleive the world as you see it with your eyes then god help you.

 Cannot agree more. Finally someone who has a clue about chess.

'believe the world as you see it' is the basis of science.Fischer,as you say, proved his mastery by beating Spassky. Fischer was the top of his day and noones cheap swipes can take that honour from him. Yes, and this thread is becoming boring 1

Where's the evidence that Fischer was stingy and selfish?

  What he say and what he did .

For a long time, Fischer gave away a huge percentage of his income to the Worldwide Church of God (may have the name wrong but it was something like that) and only stopped because he believed they were swindling him. He turned down millions by refusing to appear in TV commercials endorsing various products. Yes, he demanded a lot of money to play - why shouldn't he? Why should an inordinate amount of money go to the organizers and, in the case of the WCC, to people who filmed the match. Without Fischer, there wouldn't have been any revenue and he understood that. Any GM today who thinks Fischer was selfish yet who benefits financially from chess is quite an ingrate/hypocrite