Pick one.

I assume we're taking all these players at their peak. I don't know a ton about chess history, but I know Tal and Petrosian were both world champions in the 60s. Tal's peak rating was 60 above Petrosian, so he's gotta be the favorite in that matchup.

Between Karpov and Kasparov, Kasparov has to be the slight favorite based on their match score and World Championship matches, as mentioned above.

Between Carlsen and Fischer, I would actually prefer Carlsen.

So the score is 1-2 in favor of team #2, so I'm going with team #2.

By this point you have chosen your team. Now comes the real question:

Q: Of the 3 members of the team you have chosen, you have to **** one, marry one & kill one.. what do you do...

@NOTFOXAnonymous The first match Karpov-Kasparov started with 4 wins for Karpov, 0 wins for Kasparov and 5 draws.
On instigation by his mentor and former world champion Botvinnik, who disliked Karpov, Kasparov began to play for draws instead of wins. The match ended with 5 wins for Karpov, 3 wins for Kasparov and 40 (!) draws. They played for the first to win 6 games. FIDE president Campomanes stopped the match because it would impair the health of the players. The circumstances of this match were extraordinary. If we subtract this unusual match form their record, that leaves 18 wins for Kasparov, 13 wins for Karpov and 64 draws.

@tpr I know the story my friend :D

It's a long discussion and i'm not sure we can agree each other :D

In my opinion, we can't substract those games : once again, it's just my opinion and i might be wrong ! ^^
At those times, i think Karpov was still better than Kasparov and after his horrible start, Kasparov could just play for the draw and avoid loosing the 6st match.
The 3 wins Kasprov got in this match were the game 32, 47 and 48. (and the match get stoppped after the game 48).
After so many month (6 if my memory is correct), Karpov was in a really bad shape physically and i think this is the reason Kasparov won those games (Kasparov was and still is really atlethic).
So, in conclusion, i think it's unfair to substract those games cuz it was the last match were Karpov (which is 12 years older than Kasparov) still had an edge.
[I hope you can understand what i wrote, i'm french and my english is really bad, sorry]

I remember those matches of the mid-eighties so clearly...Just a little boy back then , I was trying to analyze the positions with a NOVAG JADE machine , which had a "powerful" 32 Kb chess program... The analysis was awful , but there was no way for me to find a better one!
Time goes by very fast...

@FatesWarning You dont have to flagellate yourself my friend :D
If you remember those matches so clearly, that might prove your memory is still good despite the fact you're so old :D

[Je comprends parfaitement.]
I want to say these games show an immature Kasparov, who went all out to win in every game, but who got countered by the experienced Karpov. So the wins by Karpov are due to the lack of experience of Kasparov and the wins by Kasparov by the physical exhaustion of Karpov and the exceptional high number of draws stems from the diabolic advice of veteran Botvinnik. By the way the elder Karpov still plays, while the younger Kasparov is retired.

I would be glad to have a Micha Tal in my drinking team. <3

@tpr

I totally agree : in those games, Kasparov was not at his best probably due to his lack of experience but since Karpov is 12 years older than Kasparov, i think we can't forget the games when he was at his best and just count the game were Kasparov was at his best :D
[and btw, fuck you !!! you can speak french and you force me to show the world how my english is pathetic, i hate you :D]

Also in his excellent book on the matches Kasparov gives the games of the first match without any comments.
[Veux m'excuser, j'écris en anglais pour que les autres puissent me comprendre. C'est bien lichess, ne pas liéchecs...]