who should be the real 1975 world champion karpov or fischer?

Karpov. Fischer was too scared to play him.

Would have been a funny WC though, with both turning up late for every game. Heh. 

Karpov. Fischer fans don't want to hear it, but Karpov was simply a better player. If it wasn't for Kasparov, Karpov would be thought of as the best WC ever. His genius is, sadly, seen as less due to the fact that he shared the stage wtih Gary. 

Then it would be Kasporov, not Karpov or Fischer.  Though I root for Fischer.  Where's your sense of patriotism?  :)

This thread is for the 1975 World Champion. Such an American...

 Where was Bobby's sense of patriotism?

I've seen GMs remembering the feelings at that time say that Fischer was the favorite, but Karpov did have good chances, so it definitely wasn't a foregone conclusion.

Fischer's rating was almost 100 points higher than Karpov, so that is very good evidence that he would have been more likely to win, assuming he prepared sufficiently to dust off the rust due to his inactivity since winning the world championship.

For example, here is Kasparov (http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/mar/10/bobby-fischer-defense/?pagination=false):

There is a great deal of evidence to build Fischer’s case as the overwhelming favorite had the match taken place. This includes testimony by Karpov himself, who said Fischer was the favorite and later put his own chances of victory at 40 percent.

Yifan Hou just got done beating 4 chess players ranked over a hundred points higher than her in Gibralter

I think Bobby would have edged out Karpov in 1975, but I think Karpov would have come back in 1978 and - older, wiser, and more experienced - won the title.  Unlike Spassky, who was crushed by Bobby and didn't quite have the same appetite for the game, or Petrosian, who after becoming WC didn't have the same motivation to win - Karpov could take a licking and keep on ticking, as the saying goes.  He certainly showed that against Kasparov.  After having his 5-3 lead erased by FIDE, (and after having failed to win after being 5-0 ahead), almost any other player would have crumbled pyschologically and been blown off the board in the 2nd match.  Instead, Kasparov barely took the 2nd match by a single point.

I also think the experience that Karpov could've gained playing Fischer would have been enough to have kept Kasparov at bay for several years ... if we'd seen a Fischer-Karpov match in 1975&78, I don't think Kasparov becomes WC until the 90s.  Just my thoughts ...

The 1975 match did took place, fischer just resigned beforehand - gave up.

He pushed over his king before even making a move. It was Karpov 12 (or whatever) and Fisher 0.

Karpov won the match. He was the better sportsman. Chess is also about showing up for your game.

There is no maybe or if. What if Fischer wasnt a madman? What if Karpov was the madman and not Fischer....

There is no use in speculating....

It was Karpov 12 (or whatever) and Fisher 0.

Fischer quit immediately after reaching his prime, not to mention no the way to his prime he stopped playing.  Therefore you can't reliably compare Fischer to Karpov based on their results. 

And really if Fischer's results were even close I'd be amazed... it would have meant he would have trashed Karpov in a match (which certainly wouldn't be an intuitive result, it should be pretty close). 

I remember some top players (such as Kasparov) talking about this hypothetical. I believe it was Kasparov that said Fischer's edge would be he was a slightly better player, but Karpov would have much better preparation due to his 2nds and so that match would be very close.

How much this comment was made at a stab at a rival I don't know. But I've never heard that it would have been for sure one way or another. IMO it would depend on how long Fischer could be stable. If he was already starting to lose it so to speak, then there's no way he could have won... and as history shows, he couldn't even bring himself to sit across from Karpov.

More or less I think you can't separate his strength from his crazy... and history shows exactly how this match turned out.

 I dunno!  I only know that my allegiance is not with my own nation I live in, though I be thankful for it.  Fischer wrote that book on teaching chess.  OK, so we're sticking with 1975 WC now.  It's 2012, now.  :)

 Fischer's terms were not reasonable, I suggest you do a bit more research into what they actually were. It was more like "We'll play an unlimited match, draws not counting (a format that suits my style of play)...but hang on if he gets too close we call the whole thing off and I stay the champion"

I don't know if you could classify his demands as madness though... if I remember FIDE was only 1 vote away from accepting his terms.

They were a bit cowardly sure, but not madness.

While Fischer's claims was unreasonable, it should be remembered that Karpov (with the help of the pawn and greedy dickhead Campomanes) and alot of corruption managed to give Karpov the same perks, and more! In retrospect, I have a hard time respecting the claims of Karpov, he, and the whole of Sovjet basicly dodged Fischer, and there is alot of things pointing thowards the direction that even if Fide accepted Fischers claims, or if Fischer backed down, Sovjet would have backed down this cycle, and give Karpov more time to prepare.

Is the any available data for Karpov vs Spassky from that year. In my mind Fischer would have smashed Spassky worse than he did, if he would have just wore some ear plugs and focused on his game.

I tend to think it wasn't going to matter who the Russians were going to put in front of him.

 No, Karpov didn't get the same perks. FIDE agreed to all of Fischer's demands except the blatantly unfair 9-9 clause. Karpov's matches with Korchnoi were first to 6, draws not counting, with an unlimited number of games. The champion was entitled to a rematch as was the norm until it was abolished after Botvinniks reign. The 1984 match with Karpov was also a first to 6 unlimited match. The 1985 match was reverted to the old format of best of 24 games, with Karpov entitled to a rematch because he had a two point lead when the 1984 match was cancelled.

As for Karpov "dodging" Fischer, I guess Bobby would have relished the chance to play when Karpov subsequently aproached him in a effort to organise a match. What happened...?