Mash~take it easy or up your meds. Hijo & I are just doing the typical back & forth. If you want in on this convo, take a deep breath, wash out your mouth & most importantly...get your head out of your...er...the sand. Thank you
If Fischer would played Karpov for the World Champion, who would win?

Hijo-indeed. Much of your description of Garry Kasparov's attributes (I'm too lazy ta re-quote you) mirrors what most publications & people had said about Robert J. Fischer. Dunno who is really blind. I admire and do agree with your opinion. My idol will always be Fischer. Damn Magnus, Anatoly, and Garry. Heh.
I, like the OP, learned alot from Fischer & Karpov. But for the sake of this discussion, I had ta side with Fischer. Kasparov is awesome. His legacy won't be duplicated in this century methinks.
I just have never learned or related to him (Garry) on any level. He's just fascinating, that's all.
Sorry I don't share your enthusiasm (like you don't share mine for Fischer) but as an chessfan, Kasparov is on my top 3 list All-time Greats.
Finally, I appreciate your insights (even though not exactly in-line with the theme of this forum)
8)

Unagreeable person. 'Just because you don't like Fischer, then shut up'. Lmao bro. When did I ever infer/imply/outright say such a thing, man? C'mon.
Obviously you just want ta troll. Give it up.
Oh. Btw. Using fancy graphics & Caps just shows you're over-compensating my man.
Think about it.

Fisher would have won in 1975 and 1978. In 1981 karpov would have finally won. Karpov was new era of chess as kasparov quoted. So was kasparov and you seen what karpov did to him in the first encounter. Fisher was not scared. He was long gone before became a house hold name. Besides karpov was still improving and fisher was at his peak. I do agree fisher wanted to play himself into shape tho.Also, I am tired of people saying he used his demands to hide from karpov. How many times have fisher quit tournaments, because his demands wasn't met? One more thing. When has Fisher ever backed down from a challenge to a russian in chess lol.
Peace

Fisher would have won in 1975 and 1978. In 1981 karpov would have finally won. Karpov was new era of chess as kasparov quoted. So was kasparov and you seen what karpov did to him in the first encounter. Fisher was not scared. He was long gone before became a house hold name. Besides karpov was still improving and fisher was at his peak. I do agree fisher wanted to play himself into shape tho.Also, I am tired of people saying he used his demands to hide from karpov. How many times have fisher quit tournaments, because his demands wasn't met? One more thing. When has Fisher ever backed down from a challenge to a russian in chess lol.
Peace
You say that karpov would lose in 1975 and 1978 but would win finally in 1981. I agree that Fischer would no doubt have beaten Karpov in '75 and '78 but by '81 Karpov would have been destroyed psychologically by his 2 previous defeats to Fischer and most likely would not even have won the candiates cycle.
Psychological stability is an important part of chess skill. Fischer was scared of losing in 1975 that is why he did not play. Karpov had beaten Spassky more clearly in 74 than Fischer had in 72 and that was not lost on Fischer. Karpov did win in 1975 because Fischer was psychologically unable to play, just like the modern Tiger Woods is not as good as he was in his youth due to psychological and injury issues.
It is adifferent argument over whether Fischer's best games are of a better quality than Karpov's best.
Personally i find it possible to think of more great games by Fischer than Karpov. however As a practical chess player Karpov showed his greater stability.

Karpov did win in 1975 because Fischer was psychologically unable to play
First, Karpov didn't win...FIDE "won" when Fischer resigned his title.
Second, nobody, and I mean nobody...is capable of stating whether Fischer was "psychologically unable to play". Unless you were inside his head, you will never know whether it was fear/insecurity or strong convictions about FIDE and the WCC format, or some ratio of both that lead Fischer to his ultimate decision.
It is possible that Fischer had cracked up by 1975 and would not have defended against anyone, but just think say Karpov had lost to Spassky in 1974 and then Boris beat Korchnoi to become the challenger?
Isn't it obvious to anyone that Fischer would have been far more likely to defend and earn some large purse against someone he was confident he could beat than the unknown quantity to him of Karpov?
To be fair to Fischer he was unwell in just the same way that a footballer might have a knee injury.

I agree with recredico....
Fischer's paranoia was growing day by day....I believe he did not want to play that match, and was looking for a way out....either the Soviets gave in to ALL his demands, which would give him an incredible psychological advantage (he got away with that in the match with Spassky), or he would have to play in an even field, in which the Soviets would have the advantage, because they could put 10, 15, 20 people to work with and for Karpov....

Karpov did win in 1975 because Fischer was psychologically unable to play
First, Karpov didn't win...FIDE "won" when Fischer resigned his title.
Second, nobody, and I mean nobody...is capable of stating whether Fischer was "psychologically unable to play". Unless you were inside his head, you will never know whether it was fear/insecurity or strong convictions about FIDE and the WCC format, or some ratio of both that lead Fischer to his ultimate decision.
Not true. Some of us know and have spoken at length with people that knew him and were spending time with him during that period.
So stop with the revisionist bullshit. Maybe even get a chance, speak directly with GM Lombardy unless you afraid to have your fantasy busted.
That doesn't mean a thing unless they were actually qualified to give a real diagnosis.
I mean, my diagnosis of you is pretty credible and based on long terms observations, too, but I doubt you would agree with it...but I would not pretend to know for sure as people are doing here.
He's dead now, and was never diagnosed; ergo, nobody will ever know for sure. Sure, there were some people who knew him, who, of course, have told their Fischer stories 5,000 times each, the tale subtly changing, growing and morphing to entertain over the years. Some of them are even still making money off those stories and you can bet they tell the most exciting versions to ensure that the revenue stream continues. You can speculate until the heat death of the universe if you like...
Fischer's paranoia was growing day by day
Another sensationalistic point of view and a nice first line for an article in some speculative blog entry, but also just as unproveable.
Uh SS~I got the sarcastic, passive-aggressive undertones in all of your past quotes. The fact you feel the need ta be self-explanatory (ie giving definitions) still reflects this in your reply. Don't buy it. Thanx though.