So last Tuesday night I played a game blitz game against GM Ben Feingold, resident GM of the Chess Club and Scholastic Center in Saint Louis. That's my first game, rated or otherwise against a GM. I played 1.f4 for fun, pretty much got crushed, I think he at one point gave me back a piece just for fun. 

http://main.uschess.org/component/option,com_wrapper/Itemid,181/

I mean, what's a guy supposed to do? I know it was blitz and all, but I didn't even know where to begin and you really just feel totally defeated to begin with. I know it'll happen again as St. Louis continues to draw more GM's to town in Open tournaments, Nakamura and Hess are apparently coming in April for the St. Louis Open. 

Do you look at it as a learning opportunity? Kind of hard in blitz right? Do you just concede off the bat? I dunno. Thoughts? Opinions?

Sean

I'd just do my best, and play the board.  I mean, how could it hurt to give it your best shot (even if you're going to get crushed)?

This article surfaced a few days ago on the main page:

http://www.chess.com/article/view/openings-for-tactical-players-how-to-beat-a-grandmaster

I believe it deals with the question you posed.

Consider it a privilege to have had a chance to play him. Try to glean whatever you can from the experience - hard with blitz, but hey...

I'd consider it a thrill to play an IM or GM, blitz or standard play. 

Often club players only gets to cross swords with a titled player in simuls.

For me it would be hard to totally shake off all of the intimidation, but I'd go for broke using my standard opening(s) and learn from the experience, no matter the result.

I guess I'd feel too self-conscious and wouldn't enjoy the experience much...I expect they are mostly amused by our moves...so I'd try to take it lightly and just try not to blush when I make a heinous move? 

I'm not a big fan of Feingold after an altercation with him on ICC during a Kramnik - Aronian match, so for personal reasons, I wouldn't play him. Specific situations like that aside, I'm a believer in playing classical openings against the stronger players. There's no point in trying to side-step a GM out of book, becuase they have so much more natural ability to assess any given position on the board. Aside from that, most of them have played virtually every offbeat opening you've ever heard of, and even some you haven't. For example: Think you might could surprise Nakamura with 1. b3 even though he has never played it in a classic tournament game? Nope. He used that very opening to set an all-time blitz record on playchess.com of over 3500 at one point.

I remember playing a series of blitz game against a local IM. In one I played 1. b3 and he destroyed me in 30 moves, later pointing out he knew it quite well. In the second game as black, I decided to play mainline defenses involving 1. e4 e5, and yet was able to take him to a drawn rook endgame before I ran out of time. Still a loss, but I felt it was an interesting angle that I would keep the game drawn on the board in a mainline defense, yet get destroyed when I tried to play my offbeat pet opening.

Take it for what it is...a learning experience.

Well a D player vs a GM is virtually a 100% win for the GM as long as he's not drunk (and even then...). The best you can do is try to get something out of it.

For slightly more realistic situations (maybe for against a 2000 or something) some people say play sharp, tactical chess. While you may get the occasional rare win, most of the time you will get crushed mercilessly. If you play solid you'll lose a lot too (though more slowly), but you have more shots at a draw than you would for winning with a tactical opening, so just do what you want, in fact play your normal game.

Try to spring some gimmicky obscure trap on him that maybe he's never seen before.  Something like Legall's mate (although he's probably seen that) where maybe he'll think you're hanging your queen just because you're a bad player.  Just brainstorming.

But being a D player has some advantages over being a GM. For instance, look what will happen if both players continue to play until they are 65. A GM's rating will probably drop about 200-300 points. He will stop playing actively and retire from playing chess. He will miss it greatly, after all look how much time he put into it to become a GM. A D player's rating, if he gets to be 65, drops 200 points, what the heck! He can keep on playing for twenty more years and never feel badly at all! After all he is use to losing. I envy the D player! 

Play your best and feel honored just to be on the same board as a GM.  It's a rare opportunity that very few of us amateurs ever get to experience.

im around 2300 strength (i dont ever go to tournaments but i have many friends who are titled and i play them a lot), but i very often play very weak players, (coffeehouse friends)  simply becuase i like to play. now and then a 1600ish player can beat me, IF he plays absurdly agressively and just throws material at me. If he doesnt i can pretty much jsut play autopilot moves and wait for the game to win itself. Really, just sac every pice you can and try to always have him on the defensive with the center in your control. then you may have a chance. the messier the game is, the more accidental pleasant suprises may occur. just keep a look out for mate in 3s

Thompson, Charles M. from Georgia, USA. Your last rated tournament put you at a provisional rating of 1559 after wins against 1200-1300s. Granted this was 6 years ago, but in the ten years of listed tournaments you played in, your rating only went up 150 points from 1400. I seriously doubt you play at 2300 strength now. A much more reasonable estimate would be around 1700-1800.

If the "2300 in your mind" title is open I'm going to claim it.

Ok, here's how ya plays chess, boys. Ya see first you gotta check your six....

wow...ive seriously had enough of your BS

http://www.georgiachess.org/mainframe.html

In Round 2 you drew with a player rated 1163. Master strength players do not draw with rank beginners. Ever.