A 2700 rated player doesnt make mistakes very often and the mistakes he does make a 1300 player would not be able to notice,
The better players game is so sound that it is almost impossible unless by complete luck the 1300 player just by moving pieces somehow manged by almost magic to win. 2700 against 1300 I don't think he would win 1 in a million chess is 100% skill there is no luck involved so IMO it is a impossibility
Is there any chance that a 1300 rated player can beat a 2700 rated player?
Sort:
A talented and aggressive 1300 ranked shotmaker could routine heyday moonballing pusher mug Anand on any surface
SwissGoat wrote:
A talented and aggressive 1300 ranked shotmaker could routine heyday moonballing pusher mug Anand on any surface
lol
I think there is only one person that could possibly do it
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frane_Selak
He can, if the stonger player suddenly dies behind the board?
How is this post still going? Anyway, I recently beat GM Aleksa Strikovic (2500) in a simul of about 13 players. I was rated at 1392 at the time. So extrapolate from there...
Sn1p0r wrote:
How is this post still going? Anyway, I recently beat GM Aleksa Strikovic (2500) in a simul of about 13 players. I was rated at 1392 at the time. So extrapolate from there...
This will be Post # 3160, so I'll give this thread a rating of 3160 elo...
If Chuck Norris could get a 1300 rating, I think it might be possible.
MorraMeister написал:
Here is another one. The player of the black pieces is Kramnick. He missed a mate in one.
So we know if a 1300 can get to this position against Kramnik, once in a while he'll blunder and the 1300 will win. But how many times is the 1300 going to last that long against Kramnik?
Your first position could happen. And in that position that Karpov would sometimes blunder a minor piece, and a 1300 player probably (though not definitely) spots the blunder and picks up the piece. but in that position, even up a piece, I still wouldn't bet on myself against Karpov.
This was for that Fritz plays Janky chess post. Anyway it seems more relevant with tweaking(yeah right) here.
I posted a lucifer-climaxing awesome
explanation but it just whatevered I'm on a
phone anyway Kasparov's loss to Deeper
Blue was fixed nothing, NOTHING beats
human insight. Magnus and them still
keeping it a secret they don't want us to
know how adanced we are as I quote
modern day philosopher Jaden Smith,
"Look around, you'll see."
I could only dream to become a 1300 player 
Hiswill wrote:
This was for that Fritz plays Janky chess post. Anyway it seems more relevant with tweaking(yeah right) here. I posted a lucifer-climaxing awesome explanation but it just whatevered I'm on a phone anyway Kasparov's loss to Deeper Blue was fixed nothing, NOTHING beats human insight. Magnus and them still keeping it a secret they don't want us to know how adanced we are as I quote modern day philosopher Jaden Smith, "Look around, you'll see."
Sorry, I didn't understand any of this.
Many just don't get it. Of course there are any number of hypothetical scenarios where a 1300 could win. The question asked is an excellent one. It is not asking IF a 2700 is drunk and not slept in 5 days can a 1300 win or any such contingency. With normal playing conditions a 1300 will never best a 2700. Ever. Not now nor in any alternate universe you may believe in. Examples given will Never happen. The 2700 would recover if a horrible blunder were made.You all just don't seem to understand how good a 2700 is, and how weak (relatively) a1300 is
I'm talking about rated, over the board games with established ratings What is the point in making up hypothetical situations?
mdinnerspace wrote:
Many just don't get it. Of course there are any number of hypothetical scenarios where a 1300 could win. The question asked is an excellent one. It is not asking IF a 2700 is drunk and not slept in 5 days can a 1300 win or any such contingency. With normal playing conditions a 1300 will never best a 2700. Ever. Not now nor in any alternate universe you may believe in. Examples given will Never happen. The 2700 would recover if a horrible blunder were made.You all just don't seem to understand how good a 2700 is, and how weak (relatively) a1300 is.
When humans are part of the equation, you should never say never. All it takes is for some GM to hang a queen, and the patzer has a real chance. It might not happen in the next few years, but possibly 10 years or 100 years from now, who's to say?
I would bet my farm that Karpov would win the 1st position given vs a 1300.
Kinda silly isn't it to show dead lost end games and say a 1300 could win this.
Example 2 the position would never be reached by a 1300.
Made up scenarios as mouse slips, forfeiting due to disconnection, toppling over the King by mistake are just silly. When hell freezes over, ok... there may be a chanch.
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".
MorraMeister написал:
MorraMeister написал:
Here is another one. The player of the black pieces is Kramnick. He missed a mate in one.
So we know if a 1300 can get to this position against Kramnik, once in a while he'll blunder and the 1300 will win. But how many times is the 1300 going to last that long against Kramnik?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I keep saying - about one in 3200. All the other times the 1300 will get crushed.
You think I'd last that long even once in 3200 games against Kramnik? I don't. The probabilities from the ELO ratings aren't gospel truth, they're just a prediction. In general they're pretty good predictions, if rating differences aren't too large, but even then, some players perhaps handle different styles better than others, so a player might have better or worse results against a single other player than would be predicted based on their ratings. When the difference is as large as between 1300 and 2700, the probabilities become so small that the predictive value of the ratings is almost nonexistent.
No, not unless the 2700 player is blind drunk or the 1300 player is cheating
not untracking this thread is not unlike taking a hammer and bashing your own skull with it until you die.