13412 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Backgammon, Yatzy, and more!
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
What about two 1300 players - combined they would be the equivalent of a 2600 player - definitely a reasonable match for a 2700
Thats like saying 2 normal 6th graders together are as smart as a 12th grader
That HAS to a joke.
No, it was the beginning of an insidious plan to merge ten 1300 rated players into one ultimate chess machine.
Great idea. Down right brilliant! There'll be a Nobel Prize in chess given for this.
Come on man, I told you about my insidious plan in confidence! How dare you tell everyone my secret!
It was going to look something like this, but without the eye patch . . .
[mod: no spam please]
Join Join Join !!!
Hey, quit advertising please, it's not nice.
Don't forget the sword.
Masters aren't that strong.
Funny you should bring that up. My worst game I ever played in my life was in that very same line, only my opponent didn't miss the mate. Game over in 6 moves. Granted it was a blitz game and I had never seen Qe2 before, but it was still no excuse.
The original game is quite probably this one:
:) Was inspiration that game.
A colleague in Scotland-Team remembered the lesson:
I say if the 1300 just divorced, had no sleep, was sick, unconcentrated because someone kept throwing sand at him, blindfolded and played a game of cards at the same time. The 2700 might just stand a chance of winning.Or the 1300 would just lose equally bad.
A friend told me that the ratings are set up so a 1000 player has a 1 in 10 chance of winning an 1100 player. So if this is correct a 1300 player would have a 1 in 100,000,000,000,000 chance. 1 in one hundred trillion. So your saying there is a chance! Also take into consideration that in playing that many games, which is not possible, your score would improve for sure.
What about the other 5 games?
Well I sure as hell can't, so nope.
You've got the ratings reversed.
I think he was being ironic.
I once played a player rated 1400 in a USCF-rated tournament game, blundered my Queen, ended up with King and three pawns vs King, Queen, and Bishop, and he offered me a draw when he had a forced checkmate available.
My biggest upset is beating a 2200 when I was rated 1280 or so (900+ points) in a rated tournament game.
Is my opponent a fake account?
by Rob3rtJamesFischer 4 minutes ago
Does most of the world really love the stalemate factor?
by Strangemover 5 minutes ago
Is the Benko Gambit Sound?
by Rob3rtJamesFischer 6 minutes ago
by ryanjiang 8 minutes ago
8/24/2016 - Shock And Awe
by DanielsBeterThnHeath 9 minutes ago
Any way to remove a "Won on time" game from stats?
by notmtwain 9 minutes ago
by sonylizz 12 minutes ago
Black Dubrovnik II on eBay
by rcmacmillan 21 minutes ago
8/26/2016 - Kouatly - Tsheshkovsky, Hoogovens 1988
by BryanCFB 22 minutes ago
Don't english me!
by KevinLudwig 26 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2016 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!