Is there any chance that a 1300 rated player can beat a 2700 rated player?

What do you think makes a 2700 so strong? Maybe its positional understanding? But its more to it. I am talking about winner instinct , calculation and hard work.

GM Torbjørn Ringdal Hansen is no 2700, but he can perform at 2700 in some tournaments.I truly admire his understanding of chess, and have went to one of his lectures. His knowledge isnt enough, in addition to that he calculates. Hard, long and heavy. He tries to calculate one move further than his opponent, and does beat them 2200s. But the work he puts in is heavy.  GM Hammer  works hard too for his victories, but Magnus  can pick them a lot more easy (but he is 2850).

I do think all 2700 can beat a 2200 most of the time, but the 2200 knows how to make a draw, and I am convinced that many 2700s have to work very hard for their points. And they have the power to work hard.

Easy wins they comes against mistakes and inaccuracies. I can give them easy wins. If a 2700 wants to relax with some easy wins, he should play me.

"I am talking about winner instinct , calculation and hard work."

And 2700s are incredible at this!

"And they have the power to work hard."

Right, they are very used to playing in a disciplined manner. Again that's what makes them so strong. So in a sense, planning and calculating in a detailed way, that's simply something 2700s can do easily. It's like they just automatically get into that mode when they play a game of chess. For us mortals, it's not as easy to resist the temptation to be lazy and careless.

In a blindfold simul tournament with a rock band performing and having no touch move rule,, yes

I agree.

Our disagreement is about the hard work part, I think they need to put in that to outplay the 2200. When Magnus plays mostly by instinct (blitz) he plays at 2400 longchesstrenght. I guess the 2700s playing on instinct will perform at ca 2250, and that they need to add hard work to play at 2700strenght. Relax-chess is chess without hard work.

I  guess that relaxchess, beating some 1300-1600 players easily in blitz, can be a good thing for a super-Gm after a hard tournamentgame he lost, to get a better feeling, and be able to sleep that night. Relaxchess and some hard physical work-out might calm him down.

Well 450 points is a massive drop in playing strength that you're talking about. There's not playing your best, but playing 450 points below your strength is pretty extreme.

I think blitzing (much intuitive play) is dropping that many points compared to longchess. Magnus did play a fantastic blitzsession here on chess.com, and the fact that he played his blitzgames at 2400 (or was it 2450?) longchess-strengt was considered sensationally strong by IM Rensch (hope i remember correctly).

If we play intuitive and fast we can drop very far below our maximum.

If we add all our focus and calculation and time the quality of the games can be as strong as possible.

My theory is that a 2700 will close to always beat a 2200 if he works hard.

If he doesnt put in work, he doesnt release his superpower, and that huge gap is severly reduced.

The 2100 teenagers I know is very good chessplayers and does perform between 2300 and 2500 in their best tournaments, and below their ratinglevel at the worst ones.

Even an unrated player can defeat Magnus Carlsen .......

Yes

You guys aren't done yet? :)

Not yet, they are analy taken.

Oh, well thanks for saying that I guess. Way to brighten my day.

Once when I was around 800-900 I beat a guy that was 200-300 points above me so I would say definitely yes, a 1300 could beat a 2700, or maybe even a 4000 player. 

i got my level up over 1000 once, at that point it wasn't even about playing the game nor having fun, as much finding standard forms of defense, or constant variations of the same attacks and it was boring.  i quit for months and now i am happy playing 500-800's.  you get to explore the options and not be punished for enjoying the game. also, you can relax and not hold such giant expectations on oneself or others. 

every grandmaster had a 1300 rating at some point.

A new generation has been born since the thread began. 

Does anyone know anything about rating inflation? Maybe in a distant future 2700 would not be a great rating while this thread is still alive, does rating inflation work like that? Then, maybe the chances will increase?

When you were 1300 or unrated , maybe 7 years old, were you already then strong enough to beat a 2700 Fide if he made a bad mistake?

Your virtual 2700 rated player won a pawn because the virtual 2500 player made a bad mistake, in an otherwise equal position, after missing a virtual Bg4 with complete virtual equality, but it wasn't enough, he later on virtually managed to leave his queen unprotected, truth to be told in a visualy speaking delicate virtual position. :))

You are typing these virtual words on a virtual website.