He's the better player, he just lost because one part of his game was weak?
Seriously?
I'm not even sure it's true anyway.
Comparison
Sort:
Im pretty sure karsparov > karpov even though karpov is a beast!
Kasparov>karpov>everyone
Not true really. Karpov has better understanding of the game... Most of Kasparov's wins over Karpov were prepared at home by his buddies. This is no skill. On the contrary, Karpov relied mostly on his skills to outplay his opponents. The order should be as follows:
Karpov>Kasparov=Kramnik
Yep, he just had average skills other than his superpower openings that destroyed Grandmasters in a flash. His attacking skills were nothing to write home about.
SwingingLondonTown wrote:
If it were not for Kasparov's home prepared openings, Karpov would reign the world for another 10-15 years...
Didn´t Karpov have a home, or time to prepare?
JoseO wrote:
Anyone have the ratings between them in speed games? It seems that Karpov had a tendency to do better at speed games than Kasparov did, at least in the few videos / tournaments that I am aware of them competing against each other.
Kasparov won 11 to 4, with 8 draws.
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.pl?pid=20719&pid2=15940
Estragon wrote:
This is not reality, folks. Kasparov caught Karpov off guard in the opening a couple of games, but most of Karpov's losses came from errors late in the game, often just before adjournment (which was standard in the pre-computer era).
When they began their epic 5th title match in 1990 (Seirawan's Five Crowns is one of the best match books ever), Kasparov led their individual series by +1 with over 100 games contested. Their lifetime classical chess record is Kasparov +9 over 169 games, most of the lead coming in tournament encounters after Karpov could no longer qualify to challenge for the title.
Karpov does hold the all-time record for tournament victories with 120. Only Kasparov with 63 has even half as many.
Excellent information!! Thank you very much. This just shows how superior was Karpov compared to Kasparov.
Roraima wrote:
SwingingLondonTown wrote:
If it were not for Kasparov's home prepared openings, Karpov would reign the world for another 10-15 years...
Didn´t Karpov have a home, or time to prepare?
lol, karpov had great opening preparation.
So superior that Kasparov held a 100 point rating buffer over him for most of their careers and won 1.3 times as many games as Karpov did when they played.
Some superiority.
In classical games they were about equal. But if we take all those blunders because of the age and if we take out all those games won by home preparation, we see that Karpov was truly the better player.
yeah, if kasparov hadnt stolen karpovs rating points because of his buddies home opening preparations karpov wouldve been like 3000
karpov was only considered a leading expert in dozens of variations
Guyz...Respect Master Karpov and Master Kasparov... But Master Yoda @ucks them both!!! :PPP May the force..
May the forks with with you 
Nah. Anakin rulez. I have the testimony of many seven year olds to this truth. Now if one of the Ks had turned to the dark side ...
In all competitions, who has more skill and who wins is not always the same. The goal is to win.
May the forks always be with you!
Kasparov is better, because of his rating. Also, he was a more tactical player. He found more forks.
I'm a bit biased because I'm a pure positional player. 
I think Karpov or Kramnik is better than Kasparov!
I think that Karpov is the best player in the history. Do you agree that he lost his matches against Kasparov because the latter had better opening preparation? If it were not for Kasparov's home prepared openings, Karpov would reign the world for another 10-15 years...