+0=8-1 in the classical portion. He drew Tari. What's wrong with him?

He had 1 bad tournament after taking time out of playing chess to play poker, and voluntarily giving up the WC title because he wants to relax a bit. Even after this poor result he's still about 50 points higher than anyone else in rating. By comparison, in 1999, the year when Kasparov achieved his peak rating, he had a lead of just 31 points over the second-highest rated player Anand. Who you think is the GOAT depends on what you take the term to mean. If it's the biggest lead over their contemporaries at their peak, it's Morphy, or Fischer if you exclude the pre-WCC era. If it's domination over a long period of time, it's Kasparov without a shadow of a doubt. But if you took all the GOAT candidates at their peak, put them in a time machine and got them to play against each other, my money's on Carlsen coming out on top. As for why he's not dominating tournaments like Kasparov and Fischer, well, I honestly doubt anyone will ever have a run like that again. Computers have profoundly changed the landscape of classical chess and achieving that amount of decisive games is exponentially more difficult in today's game. Carlsen's opponents are armed to the teeth with deep computer lines in every major opening that are designed to kill the position and achieve a draw - Fischer and Kasparov never had to play against a 3500 rated opponent for the first 15-30 moves of every game. Finally, you may note that Kasparov himself is not in the "Carlsen is overrated" camp. It's a fun bit of irony that the guy you put forward as GOAT disagrees with your opinion.

You seem like a real Student of the game ... so you would probably enjoy Magnus Carlsen's book... DRAW YOUR WAY TO A 2882 CLASSICAL CHESS RATING

@@12jswilson nothing wrong with him, he is human, he has his own boring, sphere of interest and so on

@@rickdynes Every player is lower rated than Carlsen. Every time he draws, he loses rating. The fact that he has achieved the highest ever rating is the only proof that's needed to show that he does not, in fact, draw every game.