Tactics versus Strategy

Who is better?

Player A who has all the strategy/positional knowledge in the world and can see x moves ahead;

or

Player B who has no skills straegically but can see x+1 moves ahead.

If you think player B, then how did Botvinnik beat Tal in the 1961 rematch (I know both were good at both, but still)?  

It depends on the value of x.  If x is say 4 (or maybe even as little as 3), player A crushes player B and laughs at his pain.  If x=1 then player A will miss too many tactical threats.

Master tonydal, from what I keep hearing, Tal's tactics crushed Botvinnik in 1960, then Botvinnik analyzed Tal's style, then in 1961 played in a manner that avoided Tal's crazy attacks in favor of simpler endgames.  

As far as "x", baronspam, that's a great question.  Perhaps you are fundamentally correct in assuming that there are diminishing returns for tactical abilities, since GM's can still draw/beat some computer programs that are tactically far superior.  

Perhaps I should have asked the question a little differently...

If you were allowed to create a player with 5,000 Elo total that had to be distributed between tactics and strategy, what distribution would produce the strongest player?  for instance, an even division of 2500 tactics and 2500 strategy?  2200 tactics and 2800 strategy?  4500 tactics and 500 strategy? 0 strategy and 5000 tactics?  Et cetera.  

Then again, how much does "x" really need to be for your scenario to work out?  And why?  

There's no answer to that question, for one thing they work together, you can't have one without the other.

If you have 5000 points to distribute between the two it just depends.  If player A is strategically superior and tactically inferior to player B, player B may never have a chance to play a tactic if he's always strategically worse, and just loses the whole time.

On the other hand player A may be in the middle of executing a strategically won game but because he misses a tactic he plays the wrong move order, drops a piece, and ends up losing.

So the lesson is there is you need both to competently string together any length of moves.  And there's more to chess skill than these two sides.  For example in Tal - Botvinnik match opening preparation paid off.  There're also things like endgame technique, piece play/pawn play, defense, etc. that players may need improvement in.