If Kasparov never existed, who would have unseated Karpov - and when?
Sort:
Karpov beat Anand in a “world championship” match in 1996, and rather soundly, too. Perhaps it would still be Anand, but later in the 1990’s or early 2000’s.
Nov 13, 2020
0
#23
>Karpov had a somewhat similar style to Fischer <
That's a bold statement. I'm not debating it but I'm intrigued. What makes you say that? Karpov is always pegged in the "positional" bracket with Capablance while Garry is usually the tactical freak, with Alekhine. Fischer tends to be called a more universal player, but his openings are all attacking.
Nov 13, 2020
0
#24
themaskedbishop wrote:
>Karpov had a somewhat similar style to Fischer <
That's a bold statement. I'm not debating it but I'm intrigued. What makes you say that? Karpov is always pegged in the "positional" bracket with Capablance while Garry is usually the tactical freak, with Alekhine. Fischer tends to be called a more universal player, but his openings are all attacking.
Fischer certainly played for a win more often than Karpov however they had a similar approach to the game. Spassky, Fischer and Karpov forced top players to be strong in all areas of the game by not having many weak points. Although it could be argued that Spassky's endgames may not have been as good as others (like Smyslov) Fischer may not have been as good in sharp positions others (hence his losses against Geller throughout the 60s), and Karpov admitted that he would prefer to win games due to a good strategy than a combination it is clear that they were capable of playing in their weaker areas when necessary.
No two players are the same, Fischer's opening repertoire was more "limited" (not that it's a weakness, as MVL is currently showing) than Karpov's and Karpov would sort of have a "win with white and draw with black" approach to matches and tournaments whereas Fischer would aim to win in more or less every game. Despite all this Fischer and Karpov both had excellent strategic understanding and were great at utilizing small advantages to put pressure on their opponents.
themaskedbishop wrote:
>Karpov had a somewhat similar style to Fischer <
That's a bold statement. I'm not debating it but I'm intrigued. What makes you say that? Karpov is always pegged in the "positional" bracket with Capablance while Garry is usually the tactical freak, with Alekhine. Fischer tends to be called a more universal player, but his openings are all attacking.
I can buy that. Both players believe in "correct" play. Fischer's repertoire was more provocative, but he seemed to like taking more aggressive openings and playing them a bit positionally. That's why I think Spassky was such a great rival for him as well. Spassky took classical openings and put them into overdrive.
Hmm. Short had a good spell... but I wouldn't class him with Ivanchuck or Shirov... certainly not K and K.