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

I was a 1600 rated player and still beats a 2000+ rated opponents.

You have a point, I have not actually lost to a 1000 rated player, however I think the point I was trying to make was that, someone playing so illogically and haphazard it's possible to fall into accidental traps that the 1000 player had no idea they had created.

And the rating difference even is 1400 points! It's the chance that you would lose to someone at a stable rating of 200... 

you can win in your dreams this is the only time ive beaten karpov.

Yes and as importantly, each rating increase means the errors made are more and more infrequent and smaller. I make game losing errors often and someone so far below in rating can't take advantage, GMs very rarely make them and if they do, the chances of them being spotted and converted into a win are minimal.

A few people have calculated the probabilities of playing a winning game with random moves against someone who is grandmaster-level, and the odds are bad.  The probability of someone like that beating a grandmaster is so low, that they have a better chance of winning the New York lottery 16 times in a row than winning a game of chess against a grandmaster.

A 1300 player can beat a 2700 player if the 1300 player is a Moscow Policeman and the 2700 player is Kasparov

I think the chance is smaller than the chance that this is the last reply to this topic!

Not bad.

There would be a better chance of me winning an olympic gold in the springboard diving !  

Looking good, Reb.

How often does a grand master even bother to play a 1300?

Cool

Amazing dive, I imagine that takes a lot of practice.

lol good one, I'm going to memorize this one...

Nope, but I'd love to see it happen.

I'm just a woodpusher, but I recently let myself fall prey to a "Delayed Scholar's Mate". It was both frustrating and hysterical.

Aslong as the player is too weak to convert and advantage into a win it's impossible.

Example: A 1300 player against a 2700 wouldn't win if the advantage wasn't a queen against nothing but pawns perhaps.
But a 2700 would win against a 4500 rated player, because he wont let go of the advantage. Even if he's 4500 rated, there is no way to win a lost position.
But the 1300 player would blunder/make mistakes that the 2700 can take advantage of. It's really not the 2700 beating the 1300, it's the 1300 losing to the 2700.
I for example gave up my queen to my dad in our last game for a bishop. I'm 1900 online chess here and he's 1000 or something. I'm winning now. 

I agree.  The thousands of blitz games Bobby Fischer played ment nothing.