Who is the most overrated World Champion?

Who is the most overrated World Champion and why?

Discuss.

Overrated as in, their Elo rating is higher than their skill, or overrated as in, considered better than they actually are?

@IamNOTamod said ^

Overrated as in, their Elo rating is higher than their skill, or overrated as in, considered better than they actually are?

Considered better than they are.

To be honest, I think no World Champion is overrated. They worked hard to achieve that feat. So yeah, no one is overrated

@RuyLopez1000 and @ArjunShukla23

Ding Liren and Gukesh never deserved the world championship title.

As you know, magnus carlsen was a world champion for a decade, unbeaten.
But after a decade, he had gave up his title and Ding liren played against ian or else ian would have played magnus and ding liren would never get his title.

After the series of matches, ding liren won, but if you made ding liren and magnus carlsen play, who would win?

After 2 years, gukesh won the world championship and immediately fell down in rankings.
Did that happen to magnus? No.

And even if magnus played gukesh (in his prime) in a series of matches, magnus would win.

So Ding Liren and Gukesh never deserved it.

@aRjuN_rOy said ^

@RuyLopez1000 and @ArjunShukla23

Ding Liren and Gukesh never deserved it.

As you know, magnus carlsen was a world champion for a decade, unbeaten.
But after a decade, he had gave up his title and Ding liren played against ian or else ian would have played magnus and ding liren would never get his title.

After the series of matches, ding liren won, but if you made ding liren and magnus carlsen ...

That point is valid, but they worked hard for it. The fact they ended up in a slump did not mean that they did not deserve the title of World Champ.

@aRjuN_rOy

By that logic, one could even say all the World Champions from now on don't deserve to be.

In my opinion, Paul Morphy is (was) the most overrated Chess World Champion. He made scary looking moves that were good but not objectively the best (although he also played some brilliant (IMO) sacrifices). These moves worked because his opponents did not know how to respond to this style, and crumbled under pressure, whereas (IMO) a modern Top 100 GM would know how to hold the position and defend with care. Furthermore, his chess career lasted for a short time, giving him less chances to prove himself. Morphy was ahead of his time, but behind ours, even behind Fischer's, who enthusiastically praised his skills and 'great accuracy'.

@IamNOTamod said ^

@aRjuN_rOy

I agree with his statement

I think @aRjuN_rOy's opinion is a little biased.

No world champion is 'overrated'. Since the 1970s FIDE has introduced Elo ratings and these are an accurate reflection of a player's strength. For earlier times, Jeff Sonas has excellent retrospective ratings on his Chessmetrics site.
What you seem to be asking is if there are world champions who were not among the top players of their time. This is however a fallacy as there is no requirement for a world champion to be rated #1. It's nice if it happens but ratings and the world championship are independent of one another.