Is there any chance that a 1300 rated player can beat a 2700 rated player?
Sort:
It's notabout rating, it's about your mind. So yes, that may be true.
bong711 wrote:
Its more possible for a beginner at golf to hit a hole in one, a poker player to have a hand of straight flush, Dwight Howard and Deandre Jordan to sink 10 consecutive free throws, than a 1300 to beat a 2700 in slow or speed chess.
10 consecutive free throws does not seem all that unlikely. Are these guy particularly bad at free throws? Shaq was the worst.
Shaq is retired so excluded. Jordan and Howards free throws are like tossing coins 😎. Its rare to get 10 heads out of 10 😁
geneven wrote:
When I was a C-player, I considered myself an Expert, and I proved it later.
Did you prove you were an expert all along, or did you simply improve to become one, despite not being one when you were a c player?
The 2700 has to be drunk, drugged and be shown some serious cleavage😎 To lose against a 1300.
bong711 wrote:
Shaq is retired so excluded. Jordan and Howards free throws are like tossing coins 😎. Its rare to get 10 heads out of 10 😁
The odds are the same with each toss
Yeah I think there is no way a 1300 player can beat a 2700 player
Unless If the 1300 player has a good strategy and the 2700 player don't and messes around then the 1300 play would win
geneven wrote:
In theory, someone could play some obsolete line and even an elite player could fall into an old known trap. I didn't beat a 2700 player, but I did beat a Senior Master with a trick that would have made a C-player blush. We were both nervous and I played an old inferior line that he hadn't seen before because it was so bad, and i only played it because I forgot the book continuation. I sac'd a bishop and got it right back but I was a pawn up, eventually winning.
What was the game?
If the U1300 looks like Adriana Lima in her Victoria lingerie, the 2700 would prolong mate. Even when the queen is enprise or there is a mate in one, he would ignore it, just to prolong the game. I wont be surprise the 2700 lose on time ☺ Best time control would be classical chess time or almost 7 hours.
isabela14 wrote:
The 2700 has to be drunk, drugged and be shown some serious cleavage😎 To lose against a 1300.
We keep discussing the 2700. The problem is the 1300. That is a very low rating. I think a better question is can a 1900 (or 2100) player beat a 2700? The answer is still no. They would have to play hundreds of games and the lower rated player may score a draw (only in faster time controls) I've been as high as 2080 and a rating difference of 1400 points would be a 600 player. Folks, that's a huge rating difference. = not gonna happen.
DJsStudio wrote:
We keep discussing the 2700. The problem is the 1300. That is a very low rating. I think a better question is can a 1900 (or 2100) player beat a 2700? The answer is still no. They would have to play hundreds of games and the lower rated player may score a draw (only in faster time controls) I've been as high as 2080 and a rating difference of 1400 points would be a 600 player. Folks, that's a huge rating difference. = not gonna happen.
You would think this (and similar stuff from other reasonably strong, but not outstanding, players) would end this silly debate.
But it won't!
ModestAndPolite wrote:
DJsStudio wrote:
We keep discussing the 2700. The problem is the 1300. That is a very low rating. I think a better question is can a 1900 (or 2100) player beat a 2700? The answer is still no. They would have to play hundreds of games and the lower rated player may score a draw (only in faster time controls) I've been as high as 2080 and a rating difference of 1400 points would be a 600 player. Folks, that's a huge rating difference. = not gonna happen.
You would think this (and similar stuff from other reasonably strong, but not outstanding, players) would end this silly debate.
But it won't!
Well there are a number of things one might expect to end this debate, but his post wouldn't be one of them, since it's not even correct!
You're both right. This thread is kicked. Enjoy!
A 2700 player is a patzer. There are at least 43 active players in the world who are better. 1300s rock! A mere 70% of the world's active tournament players can outplay such a person on any given day.
Of course,if the weaker player is consulting his little silicon friend...
I am at 1408 now, and if the caps score tells anything about my strenght, it is not very far away from very strong players in my best games. Yesterday I played a 5min 5 sec blitz scoring above 96. In my weaker games , which are frequent I of course is far, far below. One lousy tournament now, and i will drop down to the 13 houndreds. I have a feeling that the caps score isnt right. I do think that the grandmasters will make so hard complications that my caps score will fall below 50. It is much easyer to play good when we are allowed to play our own game.
I'll invite you all to ask this brilliant question to Vishy Anand in the Prodigy Program this month:
https://www.chess.com/blog/GeniusKJ/new-january-2017-prodigy-program-with-vishy-anand-sign-up-today
Anything is possible. I am sure even Magnus could beat a 1300 if he tried a little harder
