That's because Short was clearly unprepared. I think Kasparov stands no chance against the youngsters.
Yes Short was unprepared but you cannot take away from kasparov's brilliance . He was fantastic. Kasparov in his prime defeated all comers and would have destroyed all of today's players ...probably better than Carlsen but we will never know for sure.
So? Kasparov himself said once he had learned from all previous champions.
Kasparov was never the best. Karpov, Gulko and Kramnik have beaten him many times. Kramnik and Karpov defeated Kasparov in Championship matches
Karpov plays like Magnus ..a grinder. for attacking flair and sheer brilliance you cannot look beyond kasparov. He is much better than all of the players you have mentioned in your posts. Kasparov has a + 7 score against karpov. + 10 against Anand , + 15 against Shirov , +26 against Short , + 15 against Korchnoi ETC ETC. against gulko he is -2 they only played 4 times. agaist kramnik he is -1 . but kramnik was the younger man so probably not a fair assessment of their strength at their best. kasparov also defeated karpov in championship matches. you cannot take that away from him. Garry Kasparov is a legend.
We saw recently in the match between Kasparov and Short just how thrilling and exciting chess can be when played by an attacking genius. What a brilliant display of attacking chess by Garry Kasparov.
Kasparov showed he still has a pretty unmatched ability to play devasting punishing chess. In this age of computer preparation we may never see such a playing style again. If so it will be a great shame.