Garry Kasparov vs. Magnus Carlsen

Aizen89

The title says it all.  Three scenarios:

1) Garry Kasparov in his prime vs. Magnus Carlsen today

2) Kasparov in his prime vs. Carlsen in his prime

3) Kasparov if he took the next year or two to thoroughly prepare vs. Carlsen at that time (assume about current strength)

Format for all tournaments: WCC with classical games (one day break every third day) until at least 25 games with a decisive winner or the best out of 25 games, whichever happens first.  

bong711

Kasparov is invincible in his prime.

Aizen89

That's what I'm thinking.  Even though Carlsen's max rating was higher, I was looking through Kasparov's games and they look so much more alive and aggressive.  Here's my guess: 

1) Kasparov wins

2) Kasparov wins but it's super close

3) Carlsen wins but it's a really close match (Carlsen doesn't win by more than 2 points)

bong711

Carlsens and others are inflated. Karpov prime is better than Carlsen.

bong711

ELO

autobunny
bong711 wrote:

Kasparov is invincible in his prime.

When was his prime?

bong711

Kasparov was in invincible during 80s n 90s. In WCC against Anand and Short, he destroyed them. Only Karpov offered great opposition.

autobunny

87 was Kasparov's +4 -4 match with Karpov, especially for those who complain about Carlsen.

Bereket000

1)Draw 2)carlsen wins 3)carlsen destroys

fabelhaft

Kasparov may be the greatest ever, but he is 55 years old, and the idea that he might be able to compete with Carlsen after some thorough preparation is just too much. I don't think he would win in any of the other versions of the match either. One of Carlsen's main strengths is neutralising opening preparation of the opponent, while Kasparov had the best opening preparation. He sure knew how to play apart from that, but especially against "dry" Carlsen style opponents like Kramnik and Karpov he (relatively) underperformed. In the six matches he played against them 1984-2000 he scored +21-21=117, and there's no reason to assume that Carlsen would do worse.