Could I defeat Magnus Carlsen best out of 10 (classical time control)...

if he was handicapped WITHOUT a queen-side rook?

Hard to say what the odds would be.

Oh, you do say classical time control, hmm. Odds would favor you, but I'd expect a close match. At least closer than most would expect for a whole rook.

Blitz is different of course.

With long time controls and just pawn odds an IM should do not too badly against Carlsen.

Probably not. He apparently narrowly lost a blitz match to IM Trent 4-5 without a rook. He should pummel any non-master in classical time controls. It's what Morphy did.

I'd say any 1300 rated player's got more chances to take one game off you at rook odds, than you have to take one off Magnus Carlsen. He's the world champion for a reason ..

I see someone else referenced it. 

Both of those are totally different. Not good examples.

The difference between a world champ and a 2100 player was estimated to be about knight odds by Kauffman. A rook is not as useful in the beginning, so big early attacks will actually be more dangerous than games at knight odds, but against players from this century (who develop their pieces and castle) it wouldn't be nearly as easy as for Carlsen as Morphy had it.

And again, blitz is blitz. I think Carlsen got a bit lucky and Trent was embarrassed (in bad form for example). I'm not sure Carlsen could do it again, or against other IMs (although I don't know what time control they used)

I'd wager queen odds against the lad. :)

No

You could possibly prepare for it with some coaching. 

Quick development and open lines and you'd have a chance.  In closed drawish positions you'd be done.  As soon a he pulled back some material that woud be it too.

Out of 10., one win and a couple of draws would be a good result.  5.5 out of 10.  I'd bet against you.

What about out of 10 this time without BOTH BISHOPS?  

Would I likely win the 10 game match?

facepalm.

In a closed "drawish" position (a rook up) Carlsen would be close to resigning. At that point you'd be 99% there, just don't make any ridiculous oversight.

It's a silly question really. Just don't make any huge blunders like a beginner. It should be nearly impossible to lose with two bishop odds.

0110001101101000 wrote:

chessman1504 wrote:

KingMagikarp wrote:

if he was handicapped WITHOUT a queen-side rook?

Probably not. He apparently narrowly lost a blitz match to IM Trent 4-5 without a rook. He should pummel any non-master in classical time controls. It's what Morphy did.

Both of those are totally different. Not good examples.

The difference between a world champ and a 2100 player was estimated to be about knight odds by Kauffman. A rook is not as useful in the beginning, so big early attacks will actually be more dangerous than games at knight odds, but against players from this century (who develop their pieces and castle) it wouldn't be nearly as easy as for Carlsen as Morphy had it.

And again, blitz is blitz. I think Carlsen got a bit lucky and Trent was embarrassed (in bad form for example). I'm not sure Carlsen could do it again, or against other IMs (although I don't know what time control they used)

I certainly know the case is probably different between classical and blitz between an IM and Carlsen, but she's not an IM, as far as I know. I made my post under the impression that she was a non-master, which is why I explicitly stated "non-master," in my post.