Is Magnus Carlsen a much better player chess than Garry Kasparov?

Asked by: archwarrior
  • More accurate than Kasparov

    Chess.Com analyzed the games of all world champions and used statistics to determine how accurate they were compared to the best chess engines. Carlsen is ahead of everyone else, and I honestly believe if he or some of the other top dogs of today played against the 1990 version of Kasparov they would have an edge. The reason for this is the constant development in knowledge, this has always been the case that the next generation plays better chess than the previous one because they can add the knowledge gained from them. A more interesting question for me is who was the greatest talent ever, e.g. what would happen if Capablanca was born in 1990 with access to computers and all the recent knowledge? I think there are many to choose from then, not just Carlsen, Kasparov, Fischer etc, there has been many prodigies through the history of chess.


  • Carlsen isn't just a better player, but a better character.

    Those who say computer analysis today gives an advantage, should also realise that it gives the opponents the same weapon.

    Those who say Carlsen is lazy, getting to the top requires alot of hard-work, effort and dedication. Even if he has a powerful memory and natural talent. A lot of hardwork and learning is still required.

    It's like saying someone athlete 15 years ago is better than Usain Bolt in 100m race and using technology, talent, etc as an excuse to offset a better achievement.

  • The best ever

    Because he's more practical and positional.Higher chess rating and more naturally talented.More accurate patient.A better temperament for chess.Better in all types of positions and is harder to beat in matches.Just as dominant and as tactically alert.Also better endgame player and more defensive he would probably beat Kasparov in match at peak strength

  • He plays on a high wire with no fear

    He has the highest elo rating in history he was bored playing kasparov in a friendly match. He is more well rounded in his style and can adapt to any situation. He does not burn out before the game is played and continuously presses players in uncomfortable positions and needles to say but he will be a much better player in the near future when he matures and realizes his potential.

  • Magnus Carlsen is a prodigy using his multiple INTELLIGENCE in focusing a gameplay.

    At a young age, Magnus manage to play and defeat extreme opponents also achieving the chess titles by his molded brain for chess. His brain works so fine and right while Kasparov plays so elusive. Showing many sacrifices, modern chess players and computers also see open spots on the war of chess.

  • Carlsen will win

    It is unfair to compare as they are from two different generations.
    I have been following chess for a very long time and i think Carlsen is an improved karpov and is also more versatile. That will make Kasparov very difficult to defeat carlsen if they play today. Remember that kasparov barely managed to defeat karpov. The human race is also evolving and we will have stronger players in teh future

  • Carlsen isn't utilizing his full potential.

    Garry Kasparov is the type who worked diligently and hard to become the world champion. He hates losing and wills himself to be the best by pushing himself to his limits. With an iq of 130 he accomplished a feat that not many people with the same level of intelligence could accomplish. Carlsen on the other hand has extreme talent and intelligence, the type of person who doesn't have to work as hard to get the same level of results. He absorbs information like a sponge and nonchalantly plays chess and has fun doing it. Carlsen has a much more potential than garry kasparov, and if he just put in the hard unrelenting work that garry kasparov did he would defintitely show his true genius.

  • Carlsen is the strongest player in the history of chess .

    Carlsen would have been the youngest world champion if he had not pulled out in the 2012 cycle , Kasparov is a great player no doubt, but Carlsen is simply more talented and relentless. He is also more psychologically stable, the one area where Carlsen is lacking compared to Kasparov is his work ethic, this will cause him many problems with Caruana. Moreover Carlsen is not disparaging his opponents like Kasparov did and focus more on himself rather than chess. Chess is a wonderful game and not some means to cult of personality like Kasparov tries to implement.Simply put Carlsen is better than Kasparov and if he has looks like a Blonde Assassin , well thats a great bonus .

  • Apple and oranges by comparison!!

    Look at the level of chess being played and the strength of players today. Kasparov was anomaly in his time but his strength is a norm today. Forget it if you are not a GM by 14!!, to sum it today knowledge is not a competitive advantage today as it was when Kasparov played.

  • Highest rating in history, extremely accurate chess

    Carlsen long ago broke Kasparov's ELO record and even accounting for inflation his sensational 2889 high (only 11 points from 2900!!) is amazing. Carlsen is the first to hold WC title in all 3 formats (standard, rapid, blitz) at one time. His chess is extremely accurate and punishes even the smallest errors. Kasparov relied on often unclear dynamic sacrifices which were later found to be unsound (by computer analysis). Carlsen instead focuses on laser-accurate moves which slowly grind the opponent to dust, including elite GMs.

  • The people who says that carlsen is better than kasparov is because they live today in this time

    There is no any legend to play vs carlsen, (somebody who belongs to magnus generation) and it makes the work easy, and carlsen says that chess is not all for him, and thus he can win, he wants to scare all with this, a playet must to show all his capability, i dont think that was his purpose to loose vs caruana or nakamura, is stupid, and a legend like kasparov is universal, he has all the qualities for be unforgettable, and the reality is that the people want to create their legends, not to leave the legends raise, want to make us believe lies .

  • The people say today that carlsen is better only because they live today, and now is their time

    Kasparov is from the greatest time in history. The 20 century, he is better considering this by default, and carlsen is not good as kasparov when kasparov was 24 years, the legends are for ever, nobody will can make us feel as kasparov vs deep blue, vs karpov, and there are no more legends like kasparov beated in his time,

  • Not as good as Kasparov

    For all his new good looks and appeal, the youngster is neither as accurate as the Russian, nor will his impact on chess be greater. Kasparov has stood the test of time, and this is from the age when openings weren't subject to computer analysis forty fold deep. I'm sorry but it's Kasparov all the way for me!

  • Kasparov all the way

    Kasparov is the much better player. He even taught magnus! I have watched some of garys chess base tutorial vids and so that is how i know that he is the real deal. To my knowledge the norweigan hasn't even made any tutorials, so i think there is not a hells chance he could beat him in a one on one!

  • Kasparov is the best

    Kasparov maintain his domination over a decade carlsen is starting his domination. If carlsen dominate for decades only than we think about that. Kasparov is a perfect player in every field but carlsan openings are not better than kasparov till now, other than this in my opinion kasparov is kasparov there is no comparison with him from the history and till now.....

  • Kasparov is the best

    Kasparov maintain his domination over a decade carlsen is starting his domination. If carlsen dominate for decades only than we think about that. Kasparov is a perfect player in every field but carlsan openings are not better than kasparov till now, other than this in my opinion kasparov is kasparov there is no comparison with him from the history and till now.....

  • No way Carlsen us better than Kasparov.

    When Kasparov took the title from Karpov in 1985, he simply swept the chess world like a storm. Beating opponents by any means characterized his personality, a trait the great Bobby Fischer possessed during his time. His aggressive play combined with good preparations were to mich for his opponents. Also I disagree that Carlsen is more artistic than Kasparov. An artistic game need not be the most ptecise or perfect game

  • Kasparov is a living legend

    Carlsen is probably the greatest chess player today, but you can't compare him to Kasparov. Kasparov has had many obstacles in his life, both on and out of the chess board. He has taken games from great players in the 20th century such as Mikhail Tal, Karpov, Viktor Korchnoi, and also beaten players who are still strong today, like Viswanthan Anand and Veselin Topalov.

    Not to mention that he made a DRAW against a computer in 2003 which can calculate almost 3 million moves in less than a minute.

    Carlsen is a good player but he still has a long way to go to even reach the status of a legend who Kasparov is.

  • Kasparov Plays Immortal Games

    Kasparov has many more immortal games and brilliant strategic, positional, or tactical sacrifices than Carlsen. Carlsen has barely made any brilliant sacrifices in recent games and he does not have any amazing immortal games. Basically, look at Kasparov's Immortal Game against Veselin Topalov and compare it to the level of Carlsen's play.

  • Kasparov's legacy is unparallel.

    While Magnus is arguably the strongest of all active chess players, whether he has the qualities and stamina of the "gods" Alekhine, Capablanca, Kasparov and Karpov remains to be seen. In a few years we shall have much more data on the issue, and our views will be wiser. Only time can settle the controversy. In the meantime we should keep our eyes open, looking for the next champion.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.