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

• 3 hours ago · Quote · #3181

Reb, it can happen in an olympiad. I know there have been some matches against extremely low-rated players in the olympiads, but I don't think there have been any with that big a difference.

That's been one of my points for months now.

• 2 hours ago · Quote · #3182

One of these days, you just wait.

The scenario about the GM having a heart attack during play with a 1300 could happen someday. An even more interesting scenario I'd like to see is a GM becoming senile during that game, suddenly forgetting how the horsie moves...

(OK, you guys know I'm just having fun, right? )

• 2 hours ago · Quote · #3183

If the 2700 player is drunk and hasn't slept in 40 hours, I'd say yes he could lose to the 1300.

• 118 minutes ago · Quote · #3184

FC Rubin has won FC Barcelona in Champions League so can do 1300 rated over 2700 rated one

• 110 minutes ago · Quote · #3185

There's far less than a 1/3200 chance. The 1/3200 is the number of points a 1300 will score. That's more likely to be two draws than one win.

And even that doesn't give the odds accurately.

In order to calculate this, you have to include the number of times a 2700 will play a 1300 in a game that will matter.

If you consider all of that, the answer becomes "astronomically small".

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Once again, I am argueing with idiots. 1/3200 is the odds that a 1300 will defeat a 2700 rated player according to the person (ARPAD ELO) who invented the rating system, and the win expectancies. Yes, it is 1/3163. Go find the freakin website, read and do the math yourself.

And quit arguing with me. Your argument is with the inventor of the rating system. For the record, I am both an Actuary and a math major............. gawd.

Oh, and yes. 1/3200 is the expected number of points the lower rated player will win in a single match. meaning, if they play 3200 games in a row, the 1300 will be expected to get one point. Not one rating point, one game point.

• 90 minutes ago · Quote · #3186

once again Morra can not see the fallacy of his theorum. A math major calling everyone idiots..gawd. the system works fine up to a limit. it fails describing a 1400 point difference. just like mathamatical theorums fail when attempting to describe the extreme. new theorums, new concepts are needed to describe never before seen events.

playing a numbers game, filling in the x and y to prove z is easy do do when you begin with an assumption z is true.

here is a challange Morra, one I am sure you can quickly solve. What are the chances a 100 rated can win vs a 3000 rated player? A possibilty exists, right?

,

• 61 minutes ago · Quote · #3187

Even monkey making totally randomly moves can win 3000 rated player. The probability is small but not zero. Even if he not knows the rules.

• 41 minutes ago · Quote · #3188

we,ve heard the monkey typing a shakespere novel arguement....given enough time. Wake up! It will never happen. 0.0000000 to infinity chanch.

many want to believe there is always a chanch. the mind is allowed to play tricks with faulty logic.

• 27 minutes ago · Quote · #3189
MorraMeister wrote:

Once again, I am argueing with idiots. 1/3200 is the odds that a 1300 will defeat a 2700 rated player according to the person (ARPAD ELO) who invented the rating system, and the win expectancies.

Listen, idiot, this was argued nearly on the very first page and at least 100 times in that last 3000+ posts.

Elo doesn't work for this range. Mr math major... I'm sure doing those exponents really let you flex those math muscles (lol, you really think no one else has done this but you?) maybe at some point you'll learn the predictive usefulness of some equations doesn't work for any range of input... also Elo doesn't deal with win expectancy at all, it deals with (as I'm sure you know, just a slip) expected score which can be any combination of wins and draws.

Anyway, the topic as moved way past that point of that little equation, but admittedly tends to go in circles because people, including me, don't want to read 3000+ posts. SmyslovFan is up to date though. Stop wasting your breath... err, keystrokes.

• 18 minutes ago · Quote · #3190

Morra resorted to an ad hominem attack and missed the point. There's more than one way to score 1/3200. It's far more likely for the U1300 to score that one point with two draws against a higher rated player than with one win.

Any time a 2700 would get into dead lost position, he could just offer a draw. Anyone who has ever been +2000 will have experience with this, and most players over +1800 have probably been able to drawlost positions against amuch lower rated players.

I'm sure I've mentioned this before, but scientists actually tried the monkeys and typewriters experiment. The result: after one day, all of the typewriters were broken, most of them were covered with feces, and one page had the letter "s" printed repeatedly on it.

Not so different from what happens online with humans, I suppose!

• 8 minutes ago · Quote · #3191
SmyslovFan wrote:
...I'm sure I've mentioned this before, but scientists actually tried the monkeys and typewriters experiment. The result: after one day, all of the typewriters were broken, most of them were covered with feces, and one page had the letter "s" printed repeatedly on it.

I wish I could have been there to see that. Scientists in lab coats holding clipboards...

• 3 minutes ago · Quote · #3192
bluepawn wrote:

I could only dream to become a 1300 player

not untracking this thread is not unlike taking a hammer and bashing your own skull with it until you die.

• 3 minutes ago · Quote · #3193
0110001101101000 wrote:
MorraMeister wrote:

Once again, I am argueing with idiots. 1/3200 is the odds that a 1300 will defeat a 2700 rated player according to the person (ARPAD ELO) who invented the rating system, and the win expectancies.

Listen, idiot, this was argued nearly on the very first page and at least 100 times in that last 3000+ posts.

Elo doesn't work for this range. Mr math major... I'm sure doing those exponents really let you flex those math muscles (lol, you really think no one else has done this but you?) maybe at some point you'll learn the predictive usefulness of some equations doesn't work for any range of input... also Elo doesn't deal with win expectancy at all, it deals with (as I'm sure you know, just a slip) expected score which can be any combination of wins and draws.

Anyway, the topic as moved way past that point of that little equation, but admittedly tends to go in circles because people, including me, don't want to read 3000+ posts. SmyslovFan is up to date though. Stop wasting your breath... err, keystrokes.

not untracking this thread is not unlike taking a hammer and bashing your own skull with it until you die.