On the other hand, if we're talking about things like a coin flip, then the odds there are obviously very reliable. The variables are all kept perfectly in check in that kind of analysis.
Is there any chance that a 1300 rated player can beat a 2700 rated player?
Sort:
I am rated 2428 and i dont see myself losing to a 1300 1 of each 10.000 games
I really did not wish to get into details of how cards might be influenced "by using the mind" but I I think I should diffuse some thoughts of my sanity.
You're all aware of the card mechanic who can perform wonders with a deck of cards. Most of you would not believe some of the things as being remotely possible, but with great deal of practice they achieve unheard of skills. So next. With careful and expert observation of a dealers habits and methods of shuffling, cutting, it is possible to subtly influence the cards (how the dealer collects and shuffles) to achieve a desired result. Enough said.
0110001101101000 wrote:
Maybe you could think of it like that thing where a ball is dropped down and there are lots of pegs, and it bounces to the left or right of each peg on the way down and finally into a slot.
The last spin of the wheel after getting 9 reds in a row is sort of like when the ball hits the last peg, it can either go to the left or right, 50/50... but that doesn't mean the idea that one of those final two slots it will end up in was likely before the ball was dropped. Before the ball was dropped, it was very unlikely.
So yeah, on the first spin, it was unlikely to get 10 red in a row. On the last spin it's about 50/50. There's no contradiction.
Right. Because now that you're at the tenth spin, you don't have to speculate that the first nine will be red in order to get ten red in a row. If you predicted this before you started, you'd have to first make the lofty assumption that you'd even get 9 in a row first. You now know that lofty assumption has turned out true, but haven't had to take the big risk that it wouldn't be true.
Sometimes life doesn't go the way you see it!
But I sympathize... subtract 1400 from my rating and you pretty much have a pigeon, and I don't see myself losing to a pigeon 
mdinnerspace wrote:
I really did not wish to get into details of how cards might be influenced "by using the mind" but I I think I should diffuse some thoughts of my sanity.
You're all aware of the card mechanic who can perform wonders with a deck of cards. Most of you would not believe some of the things as being remotely possible, but with great deal of practice they achieve unheard of skills. So next. With careful and expert observation of a dealers habits and methods of shuffling, cutting, it is possible to subtly influence the cards to a desired result. Enough said.
Well, sure, but then you should have just said that you can make something look like it would be one thing but instead it's something else. What you originally said sounded more like creating magic just by hoping the card to be a certain way.
I believe in miracles!
mdinnerspace wrote:
Here is something unknown to many and not published. Many players "practice" (attempt) to influence cards, especially those flopped, with their minds! It is believed as possible.
I think too much was read into my statement. The mind is certainly used. Other people's mind can be influenced by your own. Whether you want to call this 'magic" or not, I do not discount the possibility.
In other words, 2 weeks before the competition, they tell a few dealers that if they happen to win a lot of money, they'll likely show their appreciation with a generous "gift" to whoever to be dealing that hand 
It's been real. So long and good chess.
Probably at some things but not Chess
That's called cheating 0110. Not allowed in my book. I think you were joking around. In the old west, making such an accusation would get you shot!
You know, it's kind of funny how in many other situations people can understand the power of numbers. Like, if they are shown something that isn't very hot but then are told that the next thing in front of them is a hundred times hotter, then they might get scared because they know that, yeah, the first thing wasn't hot, but this is one hundred times hotter! Yet, they don't seem to apply that to casino type stuff. That's really all it is. A million tries at a one in a million shot is like taking something that barely hurts at all, but make it a million times stronger. Then it's incredibly potent.
Haha, yeah.
Or how about, if I shoot you with this gun, there's only a 1 in a 1000 chance you'll surive!
People would say
"that's the same as zero! I'll die for sure!"
But you tell them 1 in 30 million chance of winning the lottery and they say
"there's always a chance!"
---
Not that these are unreasonable reactions of course, just that people are biased or don't think about what the chance means.
RetiFan wrote:
Of course, I'm talking about games when both players want to win.
I also don't buy %0 percent chance, because I think I can get a win against a Boris Gelfand type blunder.
Yes, a 1300 player can
RetiFan wrote:
This is one of games from year 2010 when I was around 1300. My opponent was 2023. That was a 700 pts gap. However 2700 against 2000 won't be that easy I guess.
Wow. An over 2000 player blunders a rook late in the game like a 1300 player???
You're quoting 4 year old posts.
Here's the deal, a 1300 player can beat a 2700 player if and only if they are relativly equal in performance. Meaning that the ratings numbers are just nubmers. Example the 2700 player plays weaker and thus in reality is not a 2700 player any more. Same thing goes for the 1300 player. If the 1300 player becomes stronger over the year but hasn't played in any tournaments but is still rated 1300, is that player really rated 1300 anymore?
JuergenWerner wrote:
Here's the deal, a 1300 player can beat a 2700 player if and only if they are relativly equal in performance. Meaning that the ratings numbers are just nubmers. Example the 2700 player plays weaker and thus in reality is not a 2700 player any more. Same thing goes for the 1300 player. If the 1300 player becomes stronger over the year but hasn't played in any tournaments but is still rated 1300, is that player really rated 1300 anymore?
The question is only worth asking if the ratings are accurate.
Maybe you could think of it like that thing where a ball is dropped down and there are lots of pegs, and it bounces to the left or right of each peg on the way down and finally into a slot.
The last spin of the wheel after getting 9 reds in a row is sort of like when the ball hits the last peg, it can either go to the left or right, 50/50... but that doesn't mean the idea that one of those final two slots it will end up in was likely before the ball was dropped. Before the ball was dropped, it was very unlikely.
So yeah, on the first spin, it was unlikely to get 10 red in a row. On the last spin it's about 50/50. There's no contradiction.