How much "handicap" could a GM take and still beat an intermediate player?

Sort:
Avatar of HummingPigeon

How severely could a GM handicap themselves and still reliably beat an intermediate player?

For example, would you expect a GM to easily beat an intermediate player if the GM played without their queen? What if they started without a queen and bishop? At what point would an intermediate player have such a material advantage that the GM's knowledge on logistics and tactics wouldn't be sufficient for them to win?

In short, how many pieces would Magnus have to forfeit for me to be able to beat him? happy.png

Avatar of nastydiscoveries1

when im playing with my coach (2300 elo) i can sometimes beat him 10 min vs 30 secs (otb)

Avatar of HummingPigeon

Do players ever sacrifice pieces as a handicap (e.g., stronger player starting without Queen's bishop) or is it always just time?

 

Avatar of nastydiscoveries1
HummingPigeon написал:

Do players ever sacrifice pieces as a handicap (e.g., stronger player starting without Queen's bishop) or is it always just time?

piece handicaps are more often but stupider imo. a couple of days ago hikaru nakamura was playing 2 pawn odds against a new komodo computer

 

 

Avatar of jetoba

A local (non-rated) odds tournament results indicated relative equality of various piece odds was:  f-pawn and move = ~300 rating points, knight = ~550 points, rook = ~800 points.