Could a 2000 rated player beat Magnus Carlsen?

my northwest rating is 1762. yesterday in a tournament i NEARLY lost to a 569. i blunderd my qween,he blunderd and gave me three minor peices,and then he sacced a rook for 2.in the endgame, he had a clear advantage. BUT,he bluderd and i forked the k and q. because he had  passer, i had to sac my roook for the pawn. hoever,i had an outside passer. so he lost.

What does this prove? That 2000 rated players could come very close to beating Carlsen. But out of 50 times you play him,you might beat him once.  2000 and 2850 has a big rating differance.So does 569 and 1762.

569 players will blunder more than a 2000 so maybe he can't win

huh?

stats aren't true.well they can

You could have a point saying that Elo ratings do not work as intended at the ends of the spectrum because there are not many players in the 2800+ range.

But saying that ratings just don't work is daring.

What do the rating difference formulas predict, roughly 1 in 400 or so for the 2000 player?  I could believe that a 2000 player could score 2.5 points in a 1000 game slow time control match against Carlsen, and that the formulas hold approximately true.

However, I would expect that in the 1000 game match we would see the 2000 player get these 2.5 points from draws only (e.g., 995 wins for Carlsen and 5 draws for the 2000 player).  However, to see the 2000 player actually win in a slow game, I think it could take a huge number of games, perhaps in the range of 10,000 to 100,000 games.

Not possible. Just look at Magnus' score in Brazil, won almost every game against 2500 level opposition and never even came close to being in trouble.

could you link the touarnament games?

Carlsen would obviously lose a game eventually to the 2000 player.  Whether that is after 10,000 games or 10,000,000 games is debatable.  All it would take is one blunder along the lines of 34...Qe3?? in the Deep Fritz v. Kramnik match.

To clarify my point, the odds of the 2,000 player actually winning a game may be magintudes less than whatever his point expectation would be, since I think substantially all the points he would be getting would be coming from draws.  For example, I don't have trouble reconciling that the 2,000 player might score 1/400th of the points in a long match, while only having something like a 1 in 50,000 chance of securing a full point in any given game.

This would be in contrast to a 1,000 v. 1850 match, which may have the same point expectiation (e.g, 1/400), but a very different distribution of wins / draws / losses relative to the 2,000 v. 2,850 match.

http://www.chessvibes.com/carlsen-shows-his-class-in-brazil

http://www.chessvibes.com/carlsen-scores-859-in-caxias-do-sul-rapid-swiss

Carlsen hides his identity pretty well on other sites these days, so it's very difficult to find blitz games that he lost to experts. But the fact that there are quite a few experts who have beaten Caruana and Nakamura in blitz shows that it's not as impossible as it may seem. The difference of ~800 rating points is huge, but not impossibly large. The official odds are 99 to 1. For every 100 blitz games that Carlsen plays against an expert, he's likely to drop at least a point! And he has played thousands of blitz games!

wow.quite intresting.

And here is the long answer...

Given by Glaucio Dalla Cortt Cella (Source: http://www.viewchess.com/cbreader/2014/3/7/Game20155017.html)...

But pardal, that's a simul against 35 players.

Well, it looks like if Kasparov had a point when he refused to play against 2000+ players in simuls.

Yes that's a simul... anyway that's also an answer for the question...

Disclaimer : shameful self-advertising.

Aronian scored "only" 7/8 in a simultaneous event I was in (link) (8 boards with 4 players consulting behind each, the players being ~1900-2100). Svidler two years before him scored 5/8.

Simultaneous events are a whole different game. You need to "finish" as many games as you can fast as to spare thinking time for the ones that need thinking. Hence early draw offers, etc.

Only 7/8? Well... he is just second in the world for a reason 

(don´t worry it would have been advertising if you had win your game)

Seriously, I guess that many people get excited about being able to tell his friends that they drew against a GM in a simul, but they are not going to be able to show them the game, if it was just a "simul draw" at move 12.

lol                                                                                                              gg

If that were allowed, maybe some countries will ask his top GM to play all boards 

what all boards?in a toarnament?