Are there any situations where an Amateur might be better than a Master

Are there any situations or positions, where an Amateur is more likely to play the best move than the master? If so, please give example. And it has to be in a critical position, not a position where the best move is like +0.3 and the 3rd best move is 0.00. Also take note that the Amateur does not need to even have the correct idea or plan in mind. This also does not have to be with an Amateur and a Master, it could be a 1000 and a 1800.

i was also thinking that, but tactics tactics, i mean masters can mess up in those positions

are there any other situations

or are masters on a good day will always play better than amateurs

Another consideration might be that everyone in chess plays similar moves. Perhaps a few really tough-to-spot ideas only come to grandmasters, but most moves are "simple" concepts anyone could see. Captures, pawn moves, moving pieces - easy

What makes a chess master better than the amateur isn't usually playing a move so difficult for an amateur to find - it is that the chess master finds those better moves MORE OFTEN. It comes down to consistency I think. 

Reminds me of something IM Levy Rozman @GothamChess said on stream once; it went something like this:

"What is the difference between a 1300 player and a 1500 player? About 200 rating points? Oh, you meant what does it take for a 1300 player to become a 1500 player... it takes gaining about 200 rating points." 

Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm I am a begginer

well, how bout between a lets say 1200 and 1600?

would all this still stand true, or will it change a little?

itz ok, u will improve

yeah

even for weaker masters, strength distribution can be pretty weird. I didnt know what the opposition was until i was almost 2100!, a very studious 1800 for example, can easily be better at some niche like openings or endgames than master level players.

For example, I think you can beat GM Yuri Averbach now

citation needed.

other than perhaps a few soviet players back in the day who hung around very tough crowd, or the top players from countries that didnt have much FIDE presence for some time ( think China prior to the 90's) this is pretty rare. The skill to play good chess OTB is developed mostly by. playing lots of OTB chess agaisnt tough opposition. This happens almost entirely through rated play.

Can you get a few players that became experts or maybe a little above in OTB chess  through a lifetime of blitz skittles? sure. but it is not common at all. they would be pretty darn talented considering how many people fail the 2xxx mark while doing everything right!

not exactly part of what the OP was asking but i would also mention this

even  class players can beat even GM's at a frequency that may surprise you (of course its  still extremely rare). This usually happens however if the class player (obviously almost always at the cusp of expert) held on long enough to reach a drawish endgame and the GM pushes too hard to try to get a decisive game and messes up. I seen it once or twice in Open tournaments, one of them in round 1!

Even GM make really stupid blunders sometimes. For example there is a funny video on Youtube called "Eric Hansen Rage Compilation" where GM Eric Hansen (one of the best Blitz players in the world)  has collected his most stupid blunders and his reactions. 

i think this borders on pedantic, when you use the term Master ,it is to mean a master level player. Not a 90 year old GM, or an IM that bumped his and got amnesia, or a an FM that fixed games in his federations. 

i mean if you want to use terms that strictly, then sure, there is some master that prob plays like a C class club player, whom many many amateurs are better than!

wonder why that never happens when i play grandmasters...