17503 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
Holy mackerel. I didn't know this thread was still around.
There's a chance if the 1300 is actually a master-level player who is simply underrated.
But otherwise, the chance is very slim to none.
a lower rated player can beat a higher rated player i am a 1260 rated ..and ive beaten a 1800 rated player at the time iwas rated lower than i am now ..ok you can argue fluke..its possible but chess is about a degree of skill..., luck,...and how you play on the day..yeahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh chess rules
There is hope.
You play a man called B. Ivanov who is 2700. He loses the connection to his chess computer.
"The question has been answered, Logan 5".
It takes a lot of work to go from master to grandmaster, and those over 2700 snack on ordinary grandmasters. There is no way that an underrated but highly skilled player at 1300 is in the class of those who can upset the world's elite (top 50).
I'll take a 2700 any day, but I would have no chance.
I do not believe it is possible. Thats like getting Vishy Anand to play me.... He could easily beat me while multiple pieces down. He could make several blunders and still win easily.
no they have no chance, unless the 1300 is a trolling GM
hahah all the comments saying no make me laugh because yes, it is very unlikely but is not impossible
Those who harbor hope for the 1300 have no understanding of the skill level of a 1300. I win 95% of my games against 1300s, and would lose a higher percentage to 2700s if I played them.
Don't have time to read all 49 pages but at tournaments I have seen 1600 players beat 2200 players, 1800 players beat 2300 players and I know an A-class player who drew with a GM once.
Consistently play at that level, well DUH not likely - otherwise they wouldn't have such low ratings!
But you have to remember that there are several types of lower rated players. Those that are moving up, those who are stable, and those who are over rated.
My nephew once lost a game to Nakamura...N's rating at the time was about 1300.
Talk about swiss gambit!
It's possible of course, but so probabilistically unlikely it would almost never happen ever in real life unless the GM falls asleep and loses on time or something. The 1300's best chance would be to memorize some completely obscure not known at all trap opening, and even if the GM has never seen it before 99.999999% of the time they will not fall from it just because of their instincts and ability to see far ahead.
One of my sons once won a prize for biggest upset in a tournament. I think it was a500 or 600 point differential. Of course, my son was probably slightly under-rated since he had only just started playing. Also at lower ratings, players can make big blunders that even players several hundred points lower can take advantage of. GMs rated 2700 make few mistakes, and their mistakes are rather subtle.
I think if there is 300 ELO point difference between two players it's no point playing the game. Practically the player with lower ELO has 0 winning chance.
I won against a guy rated 509 points ahead of me. With black. After 23 moves.
I gave up a 500+ point upset in a game 10. 1400 points is a whole other kettle of fish, especially whan you consider that 2700 is not just some GM, but a member of the world's elite and a household name among chess playing families.
If the rating difference is 735 or more the higher rated player should win 100% of the games. If the difference is between 291-302 then the higher rated player should win 85%.
Possible if 1300 has 16 pieces and 2700 has a king.
For a 1300 player to beat a 2700 would require something very unusual to happen. Either a bribe or the 2700 loses on time because they left to watch a more interesting game and did not notice the time slipping away. I guess there is also the threat of bodily harm if the 1300 player is strong and threatens the 2700 if they win. Example would be like in Star Wars where R2D2 had to let the wookie win or else the wookie would tear off his arm.
"FIDE Grand Prix Round 10 - Hosts: GMs Evgeny Miroshnichenko & Viorel Iordachescu "
Are tactics really the way to go?
by ab121705 a few minutes ago
QGD marshall defense
by dhmhtrhs1999 2 minutes ago
Reproduction and Real Jaques of London Chess Set
by GM4U 4 minutes ago
5/25/2015 - Mate or Queen
by wjcsz 5 minutes ago
Unknown Chess Pieces
by kenardi 6 minutes ago
i feel bad for both UK and America chess
by Ziryab 9 minutes ago
by kenardi 12 minutes ago
What do you say one move from mating your opponent!
by MindControl116 14 minutes ago
5/24/2015 - Too Many Threats, Not Enough Solutions
by MindControl116 15 minutes ago
So many crappy wooden chess sets for sale - any recommendations??
by Reb 18 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2015 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!