18063 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!
maybe if the 2700 player has his eyes shut and its a 960 game :P
The chance is about 1 in 2000. Let's proof it with the help of elementary math. If you go through the games of the greatest players ever Karpov and Kasparov they have blundered a piece once per 1000 games. The probability that the 1300 player will punish Karpov and Kasparov for dropping a piece is 0.5 given that they have blundered. So the probability that a 1300 player can beat Karpov or Kasparov is 1 divided by 2000. It's not very small number.
I don't think so.
First, I think, with a piece down a 2700 rated player still has a much higher winchance than 0.5 vs a 1300 rated. More like 0.95.
Second, human tend to make those errors more likely when under pressure and a 1300 rated player wont pressure a 2700 enough.
Elubas: In regards to the monkey, you are correct. To put this in chess terms, if an infinite number of monkeys played Magnus Carlsen, some of them will beat him. Well, actually that's an incorrect statement - to be accurate, an infinite number of monkeys will beat him. Both the number of games played and the number of games won by the monkeys are "countable infinities," you see...
The point to understand is this: when you play chess, all the moves are right there in front of you. If you happen to pick the right ones (even if you know nothing about chess strategy and just make random moves), you too can play like a grandmaster. Given that, the odds of the stronger player winning is never 100%.
In a 50 move game A lot of 1300`s plays maybe 45 moves as a GM now and then, and maybe 4 inaccuracies and one bad move. In such games they will loose.
A Gm usually plays 50 or 49, og maybe 48 moves as a GM.
In his best games the 1300 have more Gm-like moves.
This is of course based on empty guesswork, and might not be true at all, but I can see from chess.com computeranalyze that in my best game when I was close to 1300 fide (which I have never been, my first rating was 1422), that ther were only two inaccuracies, and those two was the moves leading to a victorious line.
But that wasnt against a GM. The GM made me move bad. He pushed so hard that I played out of balance. It is much easier to play clean games against normal strenght players.
That is absolutely not true. GMs consistently make the first or second "best" move. A 1300 comes no where close. Take any 1300 level game on here and let houdini analyze it and you will see what I mean. When I say this, I mean when the game leaves book as well
Maybe you are right, but we are talking about 1300 Fide, which is ca the same strenght as 1500 online. I can see absolutely beautiful chess from 9 year old kids in my club, but they never where 1300 fide, they jumped to 1420-1450 the first time they got fiderating. Those kids can take down a-A-class players, but they must win advantage before the endgame. The masters are usually better in the endgame. And of course, one of those kids , Andreas Tenold, did beat a GM in simultan. The other won drew if I remember right. That draw was either real, or the Gm might have been kind to the little girl.
What does FIDE stand for?
Let me google that for you!
When I talk about rating, there are several scales for diferent environments. FIDE-rating is international rating for tournaments reporting to FIDE. There are national ratings too, sush as Norwegian ELO, Danish ELO, and a lot more.
FIDE = Fédération Internationale des Échecs
Hey reb i only went up 100 points of FIDE in my last two tourneys, making my rating around 1900. But it shows that blitz also helps!
2700 player cant beat a strong 1300 player being a piece down. The 1300 player will simplify the position and win. It's easy. Anybody can do it.
NEVER IN A BILLION YEARS
Actually, even my estimation of 1 per 2000 games is not very precise since we know from experience that in simuls grandmasters lose very often against patzers. So we can safely say that the chance of 1300 player beating a 2700 players is AT LEAST 1 in 2000 games.
The GM would die in a billion years but so would the patzer. If the time control was about 2 years per move and if the patzer was younger than the GM. There is a very likely chance that the GM would have to forfeit if the patzer could prolong the game to about 40 moves or more.
Yes this is a valid point. When your position is bad, it gets harder to find moves that don't blunder. So even in the rare cases where a 2700 makes an elementary mistake, it's mainly because of the stress of playing another 2700 player.
"Dayton Chess Masters Round 7!"
Bobby Fischer Lacked Creativity ?....How Dare Me !
by Harvey_Wallbanger a few minutes ago
by todd32 a few minutes ago
Geller and Tal had positive records against Fischer. Why? Explain.
by verylate a few minutes ago
What Can I Do to Improve?
by Marcos-Jekyll 2 minutes ago
Hurt/Heal World Top 10
by Arjun316694 5 minutes ago
lessons on the iPad App
by ronelspies 5 minutes ago
Reproduction and Real Jaques of London Chess Set
by GM4U 7 minutes ago
One word to sum up your perception of chess?
by egoole 8 minutes ago
why is ruy lopez considered the strongest
by gregorygrimoire 8 minutes ago
7/30/2015 - Danger Danger
by Hill61 10 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!