Positional Or Tactical ??? (D4 Or E4)

I think most people have a more complicated reason for d4 or e4 than simply "positional or tactical"... and the question about "positional player stronger then tactical player".. Carlsen is the best active chess player in the world at this time (not much debate there), and he plays rather positional but plays all sorts of openings. What do you think?

I play 1.d4 not because I am positional or tactical (I am both if I am forced to give an answer), but because I don't like to play against the Sicilian (I think it is a fine opening for black in general) or the Ruy Lopez (too many book lines and theory). Therefore, 1.d4 is the best anti-Sicilian and anti-Ruy there is.

Carlsen > Kasparov > Karpov
Tal > Botvinnik > Alekhine > Capablanca

It just depends.

As fiveofswords said, decent players play what's best for the position. If you gave him a chance, Kasparov would grind you down in a winning endgame and Karpov would blow up your kingside in an attack.