Anatoly Karpov: A Better World Champion!

Now for an opinion that is guaranteed to be somewhat more controversial amongst chess players: Anatoly Karpov was the best world champion the chess world had prior to the advent of Kasparov.

I'm just going to list a few of Karpov's pluses for now.

First, he played the game as champion, and played often and well! Since Botvinnik had become champion in 1948, it seemed that champions didn't play all that much.* (Anyone that wants to spend time database mining can refute or confirm this, but I'll pass for now.) But Karpov, no doubt in part because of the fact that he was awarded the title simply because Fischer refused to play, took up a busy tournament schedule - and he won most of them during his reign.

Second, he successfully defended his title in matches! This might not seem like such a big deal, but consider the record of previous champions. I'll ignore Steinitz, as he basically invented the title and later tried backdating it. But Lasker mostly managed to duck his most dangerous opponents until he was older. The great Capablanca** failed in his only title defense. Alekhine ducked Capablanca, beat up on Bogoljubov twice before falling to Max Euwe in a massive upset. Euwe failed in a rematch with Alekhine, who then ducked any more matches until he was dead. (True, he got a big assist from WWII....)

Botvinnik never won a match when he was defending his title. The best he managed was two drawn matches against Bronstein and Smyslov. Smyslov & Tal couldn't defend the title against an old Botvinnik. Petrosian, in 1966, did what no champion had done in 32 years when he defended his title against Spassky. But he then fell to Spassky, who failed in his first defense to Fischer. And Fischer lost to his inner demons and couldn't even get back to the board for 20 years.

So Karpov showing up and defending his title twice om 1978 and 1981 was a damned fine showing.

Karpov showed up often, played well, and won much. And, he was part of the two greatest rivalries in the history of the game - his feuds with Korchnoi and Kasparov are legendary. In essence, Karpov played 74 games for the World Championship three times against Korchnoi over a period of seven years, and played Kasparov an incredible 144 times in five matches over six years. The only thing that comes close in the entire history of the game would be the La Bourdonnais – McDonnell  matches, but that series can 85 games in 1834 doesn't truly compare to the modern matches.

Thus a more controversial argument for people to argue with, both with facts & opinions. Have at it!



* Botvinnik didn't play hardly at all after winning the title, but after his close call in his defense against Bronstein in 1951 started playing more. We probably can't blame Smyslov or Tal for not playing much, as they held the title for only about a year each, and were busy preparing for the return match against Botvinnik. Still, the impression remains that world champion sightings at the board were somewhat rare until Karpov's reign.

** Is it possible to write about Capablanca without using the phrasing "the great Capablanca" at least once?