Is there any chance that a 1300 rated player can beat a 2700 rated player?

Never say never. NEVER.

Let's take a Boxing analogy...

A normal average person (a 1300 player) fighting one of the best boxer at the best of his game (a 2700 player), in a real fight (without head-set).

I remember reading a (dubious) article claiming that 1 person out of 2 would actually die fighting Mike Tyson in such conditions...

In any event, would you try your chance against a world heavy weight champion on a ring? Not me! Never :)

Estragon, your post is the demonstration that this thread has been seeking that it IS going to happen.  That 1350 player needed to find one or two moves to complete his win.  Moves he has found before when that far ahead. This opponent choked - but the next one you are in this position against won't.

If a 1300 player and an 2700 player infinitely many games, the 1300 would win as many times as he lost lol.

1300 player has no positional understanding.

Question would be more interesting if it was a 2000 player vs a GM, i.e.: somebody that is good at chess vs a professional GM.

What needs to be factored in is the ability of the 1300 to improve

after 3000 games :)

assuming the 1300 player was a young chess talent that learned something new after each game and really analyzed the game. he might beat the 2700 after many games. 

Oh yeah, much better question.  Because to a GM experts definitely don't play shit chess.

Fun fact.  GMs think less of experts than you do 1300s.

Or to put it another way, on average, for every mistake or misunderstanding you could pick out of a 1300's game, they could pick out 2 for the expert

So I think it would be even less interesting for them to play an expert as you can currently imagine it would be for them to play a 1300.

Isn't that exactly what I said but way lamer?

  Of course!  Anything is possible.

  I saw such a situation potentially arise in a simultaneous exhibition. White was GM Solis and the guy next to me on my right was the 91-year old founder of the Topeka (KS) Chess Club, patriarch Bill Baird.  Baird was probably playing at 1260-80 strength or so when Solis took on 50 boards in Topeka's _____ Lakes Mall, I believe, in the summer of 1978. 

   The game score could have been written this way: 1.  e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Ke2 Qe4##  How you ask could a GM lose in three moves to a 1200+ player?

   After Solis's move #2, while he was moving steadily around the 50-board oval playing White on each board, there was a bit of a commotion at our end.  A wasp buzzed us dangerously closely but we chased him away three times and he finally left.  When Solis neared Mr. Baird's board, Baird captured the white Pawn with his Queen just as the wasp returned surprising Solis who shooed it away but it quickly circled landing on White's Queen.  As Solis moved to shoo it away again, the impudent insect flew toward his hand and he grazed his king which almost toppled.

   If the King had fallen over, perhaps some poor sports might have insisted that Solis had resigned just so they could say they'd beaten a Grand Master.  As it was, technically Solis needed to move his King by touch move rule and would have had only one venomous square to move to:  e2.  Mr. Baird, ever the gentle-soul, said "J'adoube for that nasty bug!" and adjusted Solis' King on its home square.

   When Solis had finished with a record 46-1 with three draws he awarded some expensive chess books on endgame play to the successful opponents, but after he'd beaten Mr. Baird with a smothered mate on move 26 he asked the Topeka Journal(?) reporter to take a picture of him shaking Mr. Baird's hand while awarding him a Russisan rook endgame book.  Unfortunately, it never appeared in the paper.  I drew in 78 moves but was very lucky to and got a Bishop vs. Knight endgame tome.

You carefully explain that your irritation at how people were responding played a part.  Next time you won't get that boost.

The point is you got into the position.

And will again.

Choking is what half the human race do, it isn't dependant on chess rating.

  During my brief USCF TD days, the niceties of the touch-move rule you've mentioned did NOT exist. 

   There was also even once a time when any illegal move at all forced the offending player to move his King.  That bizarre rule was changed after many players deliberately made illegal moves so they could make key King moves that worked in their favor without their opponent necessarily realizing why a weird King move had been made.  Edgar Colle was perhaps the most famous victim of that ruse.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Touch-move_rule

   Serious doubts by you do NOT constitute historical reality.  Both of the statements I made in the post before yours were 100% TRUE.  I suggest  before you insult someone's veracity you actually do a bit of research. It all depends upon WHEN you're talking about. Even the standardization that White moves first and the elimination of the free-rocade castling (rook moves to any open square on the backrank without going through any other piece except 'over' his King ) were only locked into our present form in the late 1870's. And "intent" in a hotly contested match is often argued about.  It was the matter of "intent" that caused the change from the "move the king" possibility for illegal moves in the early part of the 20th Century.

I would try against tyson I don't like hid chances ud mate him in 10 lol

no way

  Have you been a TD?  Not nearly all, but far too many  chess players are NOT particularly nice people.  Those intellectual bullies amongst us who invest their ego so strongly they want to win at all  costs are precisely those who'd see Solis's "king touch" as "intentional"  and argue so very vehemently.  I once saw a grown man take back a legal move which would have lost him a game to a nice tactic by a very strong 8-year old girl who he'd eventually beat.  Since the  girl didn't speak up, I could do nothing but remind her AFTER the loss what she should have done.

  Clearly you missed the word "potential" in my opening remarks.  Mr. Baird's "J'adoube" action was illegal . . . technically . . . it was an incident that highlighted "good sportsmanship" rather than as, for example, in the Bobby Fischer era, when cheap technical claims about flies in lamps were featured.

  Great example!  You're 100% correct.  Amazingly, I've seen a lot more "guts" from chess TDs than I have among soccer refs (I was one of those for about five years).  Between being out of shape and not showing guts:  a lot of soccer refs are a huge embarrassment, I believe.

I'd think being out of shape would make you show more of your fat gut!