Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

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


  • 41 hours ago · Quote · #2841

    Irinasdaddy

    Even if you ignore the unignorable fact that it was an unrated 1/0 game, the loser was rated 2200, not 2700.  Donna Alarie, rated 1700, once beat a player rated 2450 in a regular time control live game.  That's a once in a generation type win, and is STILL only HALF the rating distance being discussed.  

  • 41 hours ago · Quote · #2842

    jackfast

    I am only rated 1550 but in standard chess but I can easily some 2700s, for instance, I can beat Paul Morphy and Bobby Ficsher. How? because they are dead.

    Except for alive 2700 rated players, this would be the strategy that I use.

    (in the middle of a terribly losing game for me)

    I whisper: You need to go to the bathroom.

    2700 says: What?

    I repeat: You need to go to the bathroom.

    2700 says: no I don't.

    I shout: YOU NEED TO GO TO THE BATHROOM.

    (everyone in the room looks at me)

    2700 says: Fine, ok. Just chill, dude.

    I say: I can't chill because I am already to cool. Any colder I go, I will freeze to death

    2700 thinks what is wrong with that dude as he walks into the bathroom

    When the 2700 player is inside the bathroom, I break the lock to the bathroom so no one can get in or out of the bathroom.Wink

    When the 2700 is done using the toilet, he tries opening the door,

    2700 exclaims: The doors is broken!!!, THAT EVIL IDIOT!!!

    (The 2700 loses on time)

  • 40 hours ago · Quote · #2843

    FirebrandX

    Ammann_1 wrote:
    OBIT wrote:

    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...

    There are two little errors in your statement:
    The number of games which are won by the sides might also be uncountable infinite if there are uncountable many monkeys (which you didn't specify). Of course I know that it is senseless (even in theory) to play uncountable many opponents (and to sum up uncountable many non-zero probablities is also not very mathematical) but show me enough monkeys to beat Carlsen and I will withdraw my argument. ;)
    Moreover Carlsen maybe just have found out how to always play for a draw. Then he will lose no game.

    An infinite set of monkeys will never beat Carlsen provided he is in infinite form that never gets tired of playing each monkey. In such a hypothetical, even though there are infinite monkeys, the odds of one monkey playing all the combined moves to beat Carlsen are actually 1 in infinity, meaning it will never occur.

  • 40 hours ago · Quote · #2844

    DjonniDerevnja

    If I am lucky I can almost test this in Poitiken cup (from a 1428 perspective). Maybe I can meet GM Laurent Fressinet in the first round. Actually, the best I hope for is an interesting loss. It would be nice if I could survive the opening and play some midgamemoves before it turns too bad.

    If I win , I let you know ;-)

    It looks extremely difficult, and I at the writing moment am playing with the thought that I should prepare, and read a lot Fressinet-games, and get help from a second, maybe one of my stronger relatives.

  • 40 hours ago · Quote · #2845

    bb_gum234

    FirebrandX wrote:
    Ammann_1 wrote:
    OBIT wrote:

    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...

    There are two little errors in your statement:
    The number of games which are won by the sides might also be uncountable infinite if there are uncountable many monkeys (which you didn't specify). Of course I know that it is senseless (even in theory) to play uncountable many opponents (and to sum up uncountable many non-zero probablities is also not very mathematical) but show me enough monkeys to beat Carlsen and I will withdraw my argument. ;)
    Moreover Carlsen maybe just have found out how to always play for a draw. Then he will lose no game.

    An infinite set of monkeys will never beat Carlsen provided he is in infinite form that never gets tired of playing each monkey. In such a hypothetical, even though there are infinite monkeys, the odds of one monkey playing all the combined moves to beat Carlsen are actually 1 in infinity, meaning it will never occur.

    Naa. A perfect game of chess vs Carlsen is 1 in some-big-number.

    But infinite monkeys probably don't play perfectly randomly. I.e. an infinite set of losing moves loses infinitely. So I don't think the monkeys win anyway.

  • 40 hours ago · Quote · #2846

    danjiun

    Yes, can win, but only if Carlsen receive a telephone, or something is happen, and he is not able to finish his game. If his girl call him and call 40 minutes during a blitz game ...

  • 40 hours ago · Quote · #2847

    danjiun

    If we think about 10 possible moves, may be it is lucky enough and play the best combination in 40 movements. But if only luck is a factor, then a probability that this bad player win, is about 1/ 10^40. It is something near impossible.

    greatings, Daniel


Back to Top

Post your reply: