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

  • #5321

    The only chance for a 1300 to win against a 2700 is when his opponent gets a heart attack or something.

  • #5322

    I think a lot of people don't understand the difference between possible and likely.

    It is possible that all the molecules in the keyboard on which I am typing will all move in the same direction and it will fly out of the room.  But it is not at all probable.  It is not something I expect to happen ... ever.

    It is also possible that I will beat the 2300+ player that I will be playing later today as sacrificial lamb on board one in an OTB inter-club match.  That is a lot more ikely than a 1300 player beating a 2700 player but it is  still not very likely.  Far more likely is that I will come second.

     

  • #5323

    I wonder how often strong players default games? There are a wide range of scenarios which could cause this.

  • #5324

    Yes, there is a chance that a 1300 rated palyer can beat a 2700 player, during power outage in the strong player neighborhood.

  • #5325

    grizzy bear vs a field mouse in a fight. who wins? Smile

  • #5326
    Elubas wrote:

    "and the transitive property does not apply fully to chess ratings"

    Why exactly? It seems like you're just asserting this, not offering much of an argument. All you mention is a color analogy, which you don't put much effort into.

    I don't even necessarily disagree; what you're saying has some plausibility. But you're making much of a non-argument for it. It's up to you to explain why and how the transitive property should break down.

    a) I am not going to spoon-feed intelligent people that are capable of finding the details and filling in gaps for themselves.

    b) Colour was not the only analogy I offered, and I agree that it is not a very good one. I also mentioned ring species, and that is a better analogy.

    c) There is no c.

  • #5327

    #5323 Reading in isolation sounds like

    a) I am too lazy/unable to back up my position

    b) my analogy is poor (but I did mention a better one!!!!)

    c) I have no c

    Pretty weak

  • #5328
    ModestAndPolite wrote:
    Elubas wrote:

    "and the transitive property does not apply fully to chess ratings"

    Why exactly? It seems like you're just asserting this, not offering much of an argument. All you mention is a color analogy, which you don't put much effort into.

    I don't even necessarily disagree; what you're saying has some plausibility. But you're making much of a non-argument for it. It's up to you to explain why and how the transitive property should break down.

    a) I am not going to spoon-feed intelligent people that are capable of finding the details and filling in gaps for themselves.

    b) Colour was not the only analogy I offered, and I agree that it is not a very good one. I also mentioned ring species, and that is a better analogy.

    c) There is no c.

    Well then there is no point of you posting here, since we can all look up the answers to this question ourselves. Yeah of course it's possible for me to figure out what you're trying to say, I'm sure you meant something, but I'm not going to spend a half hour trying to do that when other people actually are presenting more substantive arguments.

  • #5329

    Such a great question!

  • #5330

    I once had a lucky win against Taimanov in a simul, when I was rated about 1600 and he was about 2500. He outmanoeuvred me completely in an English opening, putting me in zugzwang in the early middle game.

    By the time I became aware I was in trouble, I was about to lose a piece. I searched for a way out, thought I had found it, and played the move very confidently. He didn't bother to calculate it, played what seemed the obvious reply, and then he was losing a piece!

    All I had to do then was exchange down to the ending, when he resigned by just shoving all the pieces into the centre of the board. If he had bothered to check it, he would have seen the two-move deep flaw in my 'escape'.

  • #5331

    Ah! The cunning plan of lulling the master into a false sense of security.

  • #5332

    Cunning plan? By me? I was just out of my depth.

    He outplayed me all the way until he made the mistake of taking my 'escape' move at face value.

Top
or Join

Online Now