It will! ...No it wont! ...But it can happen! ... Not in your wildest dreams! ... But one time a .... No that was your imagination ...
Is there any chance that a 1300 rated player can beat a 2700 rated player?
Sort:
CRERULES wrote:
Elubas wrote:
"Or... was a hypothesis made 1st "Anything is possible " and selective mathematics was then applied to prove your conjecture?"
Sure, I think the claim comes first, and the math represents it. So I'm actually not basing my conclusion on math. If you reject the philosophy behind the math then you are free to reject the math as well.
So in a sense this is a more philosophical issue. The math can just be used to represent which belief you have. But even philosophically, it does make sense to not rule things out. Because it would be biased to do so. To say that a 1 in a trillion chance is the same as zero is being biased against that one tiny (but conceivable) possibility, deciding to pretend it doesn't exist rather than acknowledge it for what it is. Pretending that there is a one in a trillion chance of being wrong is certainty is doing just that -- it's making a jump that isn't backed up. There is no reason to expect your case will be the one in a trillion exception... but then again, you can't decide that the one exception simply can't be this one. That's arbitrary. It's certainly not less likely that the exception will happen on the first try, rather than for example the 145690th try, or the trillionth try (and of course it could take longer than a trillion tries). So yes there will (or should) be this way in which your mind doesn't totally rule the unlikely situation out -- you will never get worried about it, but you don't think the universe simply disallows it.
you write a lot. not a lot of people will really read this. i mean, come on!
Well I mean maybe you're just not that intellectually curious. I read posts by other people that go this long and it takes me well under a minute. It's not like there's any crazy math here, it's all pretty intuitive common sense stuff. I know that there are people who actually want accurate, nuanced comments. Others might not, but then, there are plenty of other people out there who make simple minded comments, so you can go look at theirs :)
Ziryab wrote:
This thread keeps going because the simple answer is, "yes, there is a theoretical chance. No, it's never going to happen."
More likely would be FOX news becoming the most reliable and trusted news source in the world.
And less likely would be a thread where people don't bring up fox news.
Less likely still, is when Elubas makes his point in 100 words or less.
In his last post, he did it pretty well in 14.
Yea... so it seems anything is possible!
In college, my roommate was a 2200-2400 tournament player. I was (and am) a 1200-1400 hack. We played chess several times a week for three years. I never beat him. He would spot me a rook and occassionally I would get a draw. But 98% of the time, he would still beat me.
SHOCK SHOCK SHOCK!!!
New and interesting debate LOL ;)
How about this approach, inspired by a game I played against a very weak player lately? When I play a friend who is a beginner, I handily beat him. I even beat him with a queen, which surprised me. So, for fun, I decided to play against him with no pieces (only pawns). And I won. I didn't necessarily win because I'm brilliant but just because my opponent is so poor. I mean, this is the kind of guy you have to constantly put moves back and say, "You can't do that, your king is in check," or "pawns don't move backward," or "knights move on an L-shape but one space-two space, not two space-three space."
But what if a 1300 player has that kind of handicap against a 2700 player? Would it be an easy win, a difficult win, or no win at all? I figure the 2700 player wouldn't stand a chance if the 1300 player just avoided glaring errors (like just leaving pieces hanging). I think I'm going to set up Fritz on one of the highest levels and see if I can win.
AntonioVivaldiJr написал:
How about this approach, inspired by a game I played against a very weak player lately? When I play a friend who is a beginner, I handily beat him. I even beat him with a queen, which surprised me. So, for fun, I decided to play against him with no pieces (only pawns). And I won. I didn't necessarily win because I'm brilliant but just because my opponent is so poor. I mean, this is the kind of guy you have to constantly put moves back and say, "You can't do that, your king is in check," or "pawns don't move backward," or "knights move on an L-shape but one space-two space, not two space-three space."
But what if a 1300 player has that kind of handicap against a 2700 player? Would it be an easy win, a difficult win, or no win at all? I figure the 2700 player wouldn't stand a chance if the 1300 player just avoided glaring errors (like just leaving pieces hanging). I think I'm going to set up Fritz on one of the highest levels and see if I can win.
Easy win. Me, against Magnus having only king and pawns? Easy. Even Stockfish is easy with that kind of advantage. I'd like my chances against Magnus if he just gave up a queen. I'm sure he'd still win a lot but I'd back myself to win some too.
Too funny Lana... it exists alright- in your infinite imagination!
Good ole Pi....what would we do without him?
How long is any shoreline?
Correct answer is : infinitely long
wrap your head around that!
Infinities do not exist in the real world. It is just a word used to describe and idea, an idea that our minds try to make sense of.
No Lana ..as a shoreline curves and meanders along, two points can always be divided in half ... infinitely. Just like our friend Pi... it goes on forever.
Now you can take back the ignoramus!
Nincompoop no less! Things are heating up in the forums today! Get out your Websters folks, no telling what big words will be seen!
Is there any chance that a 1300 rated player can beat a 2700 rated player?
IMPOSSIBLE!!
This thread keeps going because the simple answer is, "yes, there is a theoretical chance. No, it's never going to happen."
More likely would be FOX news becoming the most reliable and trusted news source in the world.