8099 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!
Master_Kann
There is no chance that a 1300 player can beat a 2700 player.
Elubas
If we believe in the infinite monkey typing shakespeare, we can also believe in the infinite monkey incidentally playing a perfect game of chess, which would be sufficient to beat a 2700 (assuming they will play a random move each time) (and assuming a monkey can be trained to play chess, with knowledge of all the rules; chess master 10 tells me it's possible! )
The thing is that from a statistics point of view, when the odds get so incredibly high against something, infinite chances don't really matter. It just isn't going to happen, period.
Indeed, I wouldn't be surprised if I never saw it happen in my lifetime.
So if we are talking Elo ratings - online ratings are utterly useless - the difference between the 2700 and the 1300 is more than three standard deviations. 400 points is the limit for any calculation of probability, so rating differences above that are calculated as if they were 400. At 400, your chance of winning is roughly the same as getting struck by lightning.
I'm not sure if that is accurate. I think a 400 point difference means that the higher rated player will win 96% of the time, or something like this; thus, for the underdog to win, it would be a big surprise, but such a result wouldn't be unheard of. (Unless the chance of getting struck by lightning is about 4%?)
So is there "a chance" lightning will strike? Of course, but not such a chance that you would need to take cover.
Agreed. My argument has nothing to do with the "taking cover." All I am concerned with is if lightning can strike in the same spot twice, if you will
I never think the chance would be 0%, because any player is capable of blindness -- mate in 1s, hanging pieces -- the most basic blunders do occur at GM level, just extremely rarely. Almost everything would need to fit in place for the 1300 to win -- the GM makes the blunder (somehow before the 1300 makes one), despite the fact that he is probably not under a lot of pressure; the 1300 sees it; then the 1300 is somehow able to not blunder it all away to at least ensure the GM to draw... etc. It's very unlikely that all of that stuff would happen in the course of one game, but if we look at each individual component, none of them are impossible (an assumption, but hopefully an agreeable one), so there isn't some law in the universe that eliminates the upset (which is just all the components alligned together) as a possibility.
And to address Estragon's example: I'm sure there would be a few times where the 1300 would actually win that final position, even if he just suddenly came up with the right idea. Clearly, your story shows that it's possible for you to allow your opponent an overwhelming position; I am going to assume that, although the 1300 wasn't able to win in that case, that him somehow finding the right moves, is not impossible, and would eventually happen if that same situation occurred a few more times. Although you will find a lot more "almost upsets" (like this one you have shown) than "actual upsets," that doesn't mean the latter can't ever exist.
Abhishek2
there's like an infinite 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001.
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.
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.
That's just a guess, right? I don't think that's likely to be true. I think they can respect the fact that 2000s know enough not to make the most obvious of mistakes, and understand, also, that it takes a lot to climb to 2000, and a lot of thoughtfulness about the game, since after all, the GMs once had to get to 2000 themselves.
I mean, you can always use the relativism argument, but I'll apply that to my own perspective: I used to think it was great to be 1500, sure, but it's not like I think that a 1500 is a patzer now either -- I'm 400 points higher than that, but I respect the fact that 1500s are not often hanging their queens, and are actually trying to do something useful in their position. Tieing in to my earlier point, I once had to climb to 1500, so I know how much your play gets refined in doing so.
hessmaster
there's like an infinite 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
000000000000000001 chance. I think you get the idea now
konhidras
There is no way a 1300 can beat a 2700 unless the 1300 is Kasparov who (hypothetically) lost his ratings because of retirement and starts again from scratch.
nameno1had
I see how it is possible. It just isn't likely to happen legitimately. All titled players who get memberships here do so for free, but are required to start at 1200 like everyone else.
* If he had a GM friend here, who felt bad at the amount of games it was going to take for him to get to his "deserved" rating and gave him a game, the 1300 could win. Other than that, it would probably require Houdini 2.0 ....
* note- it would probably cost the losing GM over 100 rating points for the loss, but he might not give a $#!T about it here, as much as he does in making the point to everyone else here about titled players having to start so low. I have to admit I don't think they should have to start more than 500 points below their FIDE, USCF ratings...
waffllemaster
Yeah, it's just a guess.
jambyvedar
No, the 1300 will never win given all other things are equal such as health, rest, etc.
a true 1700 will beat a 1300 30 times and draw 2 times out of 32 games
a true 2100 will beat the 1700 30 times and draw 2 times out of 32 games
a true 2500 will beat the 2100 30 times and draw 2 times out of 32 games
a true 2700 will beat a 2500 30 times and draw 2 times out of 32 games
Nearly every player under 2000 hangs a piece at some point in a game
Should the 1300 not hang a piece, his lack of understanding in the middle game will get him a bad position. Grandmasters typically know/remember 50,000 positions. Players at the Expert level - 2000, know 5,000.
A 2700 player can calculate over 1000 times faster and more accurately than a 1500 player. For proof of that, analyze some of Nakamura's 1 minute games.
A 1300 rated player would be exceedingly very lucky to win any otb game against a grandmaster even with knight odds, let alone a 2700 without.
True, I remember GM Yermolinsky told before he tried to analyse with Anand ang krammnik, and he can't follow up with them. Yermolinksy told he feels like a total beginner..
Ericyi
there is a chance if the lower rated player had another very strong player subtuting for them
sirrichardburton
I doubt that you could convince the stronger player to play enough games as it would take before he would lose a game but I think that if they played for a year or so (say 12 games a day) eventually the 2700 player would be so bored that he might start experimenting and then by the end of the second year finally lose a game.He would likely be glad that the chore was over by that time.(For that matter it may have driven him to drink by then which would also help).
AndyClifton
What needs to be factored in is the ability of the 1300 to improve
after 3000 games :)
lol
Aha! That's what those initials really stand for!
Tmb86
@ Dude_3 a.k.a the 10 year old kid who is correcting me.There was absolutely nothing wrong with my calculations! ... simply because I didn't make any. You are quite right though, my reasoning was flawed, the odds of tossing 100 heads are much greater than a random mover beating a GM. As I am a renowned genius, the only possible excuse would be that I was tired. :)Of course, the difference being the number of available permutations. With a coin throw we have a 0.5 probability on each 'move' of hitting the head, whereas we could estimate in every chess position there are on average around 30 bad moves which can be played, and maybe just a couple of moves of a high enough calibre to pose the GM a challenge.. i.e. a 0.07 probability on each move.
RomyGer
My answer to RetiFan's original question is "no", at 2700 vs 1300 it will be 100-0. Below a limit of approx. 2035 vs 1300 the weaker might have a chance, according to expected scores as follows :
2035-1920 vs 1300 score 99-1
1920-1860 vs 1300 score 98-2
1860-1820 vs 1300 score 97-3
You can find this list ( 51 lines ) in Hamlin's Dictionary of Chess, for example also :
1545-1535 vs 1300 score 8 - 2 at 10 games,
1415-1405 vs 1300 score 6-1/2 - 3-1/2
1340-1335 vs 1300 score 5-1/2 - 4-1/2
Some matches, a.o. Fisher-Spassky ended according to this list.
Of course, this list is just something someone once calculated, but essentially such list can be correct, based on played matches.
ian77efc
i would beg to differ on said statistics its possible however highly improbible these numbers dont mean anything it could be never or more than or barely a few the questionw as simply is it possible and the answer is yes
The list is based on the rating difference between players and gives an expected score. A score of 8-2 is expected by approx. 240 points difference, e.g. also for 2320 vs 2080 and 1140 vs 900. And yes, I am the first one to admit that this (old) list needs an up to date revision, based on facts (results of matches). And two tolerances have to be taken into account, the 240 points at around 1400-1500 level might have another result than at 2400-2500 level ; furthermore such score as 6-4 can easily become half a point higher or lower. The best is to draw a graph, with lines in it.
Being a Dutchman, I have to translate to understand texts like yours, and having some experience I prefer clear, plain lines, so reading --quote-- it could be "never" or "more than" or "barely a few" --unquote-- is difficult to understand what exactly you mean.
Nevertheless, thanks for your reaction, this makes Chess-dot-com an interesting site !
Scottrf
@RomyGer
Don't worry, I don't understand him either.
madhacker
I'd guess this is roughly equivalent of sending your sunday league pub team to the Neu Camp to face FC Barcelona. So really, a percentage which approximates to zero.
Is there any chance that a 1300 rated player can beat a 2700 rated player?
by jetfighter13 a few minutes ago
Chess engines
by NimzoRoy a few minutes ago
Shredder12UCI: left thinking for 9 hours after 1.e4 gave a sequence. Interested?
by Oecleus a few minutes ago
King's Gambit a good opening?
by jetfighter13 2 minutes ago
5/23/2013 - The Long Road Home
by mauriciorendonm 4 minutes ago
Is the book "My System" worth getting?
by tjmaxattack1 4 minutes ago
Time to get 1500 rating
by tacticop 4 minutes ago
how to get titled players to play untitled players
by Stigmatisert 9 minutes ago
Stuff Non-Chess Players Say
by December_TwentyNine 12 minutes ago
What happened to the fun???
by OldChessDog 14 minutes ago