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

Something is wrong with my "quoting".....Apple products. 🙄

My Dinner Space: I was not trying to say anything, merely stating that binary code's post was fascinating.

Is there any chance a 1300 can see all thats important in a position? The answer is yes, maybe 70% chance.

How far can he or she follow the openingbook?

The answer is maybe something between 3 and 20 moves?

Supposed 1300 is equal after 20 moves, then each move after that can be inaccurasimultiplied by a factor of 1,3 ( i think 30% inaccurasies is common on 1300 level).  Which will ge the 1300 a bad luck/troublefactor of 4427,7925 already after 25 moves. The super -Gm has a troublefactor to, but his factor is low.

In real chess the superGM wins , maybe in 30 moves. Usually they are patient and dont rush it.

In fact if you flip a coin 1000 (or probably even 100) times, that unique sequence will probably never be repeated by any person who will ever live. In the entire history and future of humanity, it will likely stand as a unique performance 

well, would you care to test my performance?

2^10000 says it is possible?

No! It says it is impossible.

2^million and people would think something as possible. The arguement goes "the numbers prove it"

My arguement goes 1st comes the "belief" that anything is possible, (excluding the rediculas) then follows mathamatics as an attempt at validating the hypothesis/belief. If mathamatical statistics can be applied, they get used as "proof" much to my disagreement.

If you flip a coin 3 times, no matter the result, your chances to get that were 1 in 8.

If you draw 1 card from a shuffled deck of cards, your chances for getting that card, no matter which card it is, is 1 in 52.

---

If you flip a coin 10,000 times, no matter what sequence of heads and tails you got, your chances of getting that sequence were 1 in 2^10000

I suppose you want to tell me, mdinnerspace, that flipping a coin 10,000 times is impossible. Because every time someone does this, they will get a very unlikely result.

Because I dont accept that statistics "prove" that a possibility exists, no matter how small, I get labeled as ignorant, incapable of reason. I do understand the arguement. Imo it is conjecture, I disagree with the conclusion drawn. So be it.

you can try it out

This is how most people live their entire lives. First they want to believe something, then they look for evidence to support it after they've decided what they want the conclusion to be. It's mentally lazy, and biased, but it's also human nature.

That's why science is even has a name. Science is simply a methodology for combating natural human biases (and there are more than a few). It's not perfect, because humans aren't perfect, but that's what it is.

When applying formulas, mathematicians don't pick what feels good after they've decided the outcome they want. The logic exists beyond humanity, beyond what people want or feel. It would exist even if there were no intelligent life to be aware of it. It just is. That's part of the beauty of mathematics. It's understanding something about the nature of reality using only the mind.

Imagine someone told you they don't believe your chances of drawing the 7 of clubs is 1 in 52. They think it's way harder than that... they think it's more like 1 time every 100 tries. They think you're using math someone made up because they know 1 in 52 makes no sense.

What would you tell them?

Statistics never proves anything beyond any doubt. But neither does induction. Unfortunately we need both to retrieve and classify empirical data. Deductive reasoning has to start somewhere.

You keep arguing the same point. I get it. What you don't get is my view/belief that "reality" (based on my observations) tells me how my universe behaves. You keep using numbers/statistics to verify that 2^million coin flips all tails is a possibilty. The math proves it.

Math Is Math to be cliches'. It is the best tool invented by mankind to help us understand the universe. It get used incorrectly when attempts are made to incorporate it with philosophy.

What do you think the probability of flipping HTHTHT is (the coin alternates every time you flip)?

What about HHTTHHTT etc (2 in a row repeating)

Or HTTHHHTTTTHHHHHTTTTTT etc (1 in a row, 2 in a row, 3 in a row, 4 in a row, etc).

Do you think one of these is more likely than the other?

I'm saying no matter what sequence you get, whatever you got the chances of getting it was 1 in 2^10000. But you're saying whatever I get it's not possible.

The arguement that 10000 cards and drawing a specific card out of the pack is not the same as a coin coming up tails 10,000 in a row. I have no arguement with picking a specific card out of a deck of 1 million, winning the lottery, etc. The odds are easily understood. The odds, of a coin being all the same side are very high. Let's say comparable to winning the lottery. The "odds" in the coin example are Mathematically the same, but do not represent the reality regarding its possibility.

Well, it is the same

If you flip a coin 3 times, there are only 8 possibilities (I listed them earlier). They haven't happened yet, but there really are only 8. Math isn't saying there are 8, I'm not saying there are 8, it's just a fact.

If you flip a coin 10000 times there are a lot of possible sequences. Again that's not math saying this or me or anyone else claiming this. It's not philosophical or based on experience. If you wrote out all the possible sequences, there would be 2^10000 different sequences. If you wrote less than that you missed some. If you wrote more, than you accidentally wrote some more than once.

I think part of your arguement involves the concept of infinity, that given enough attempts and enough time an event may/could happen. This reguires an assumption to be made before the math is considered, that infinite time exists and it's possible to make infinite attempts. This reasoning can not be refuted. Still, I disagree with it. If at this moment we begin the coin flipping experiment, the result will be soon the opposite side will appear. That is reality. Tomorrow the same. I'm not going into well, let's imagine a million years from now, with a trillion attempts made each day, it could happen, the math shows it. This arguement borders on the rediculas imo.

With the coin example I don't need infinity to say it's possible.

If you want to, I'll start at the beginning, and you can either agree or disagree with each of my statements.

First is that there are only 2 possible results when flipping a coin once. Heads or Tails.
Second is that both of these results are equally likely.

---

3rd: There are only 4 possible results when flipping a coin two times. HH, HT, TH, and TT.
4th: Each of these four results is equally likely. HH is as likely as TH, which is as likely as HT which is as likely as TT.

---

5th: After flipping HH, if we flip it a 3rd time, the 3rd flip is equally likely to be heads as it is to be tails. This is to say, the previous two flips don't make the 3rd more or less likely to be H or T.

6th: Every time we add a flip, we double the number of possible outcomes. HH from the two flip example can become HH-H or HH can become HH-T. TH can become TH-H or it can become TH-T. Each outcome from the two flip example has two possibilities for the 3rd flip. That's why we can just multiply by 2. So 3 flips has 2^3 possible outcomes which = 8 possible outcomes.

---

7th: So it follows that if we flip a coin 10,000 times, there are 2^10000 different possible outcomes.

8th: Because of 2, 4, and 5 above, we can agree that each of these 2^10000 different outcomes is equally likely.

9th: Therefore what makes one of these outcomes unlikely is not whether or not there is an apparent order to it, what makes it unlikely is that there are so many other possibilities that may happen instead.

---

10th Therefore we don't need infinite time to get a rare outcome. Each possible outcome is equally rare. If you flip a coin 10000 times, you're guaranteed to get an outcome that had a 1 in 2^10000 chance.

Getting all tails is just as rare as getting a seemingly random sequence of Hs and Ts, the order we assign to it doesn't make it more or less likely to happen.

---

11th: If a seemingly random sequence of Hs and Ts is possible, then all T or all H are also possible (because they were equally unlikely).

You have blinders on and can only see 1 line of reasoning, believing your logic to be infallible because x and y are true, therefore z is the only conclusion that can be drawn based on facts presented.

I see your perspective and understand the logic behind it. I do not reach the same conclusion however, based on the same agreed facts.

The odds of winning the lottery are x. It is a one time event. For that specific 1 time event the odds are x. No disputing the math. The possibility of winning is x. No dispute. So let's make the odds x (the same number as in the lottery example) apply to the coin flip example. The odds of the coin repeating itself as tails the same x. With me?

The difference is the coin is multiple events, repeating as the same. Not a 1 time event where the odds are x and a chanch clearly exists, but a repeating event, where the math shows the same x odds as a possibility, but in fact is a False assumption that the 2 events have the same possibilty of occurring. Winning the lottery is possible, the coin flip is not. Same math, different conclusion.

I never mentioned the lottery or a sequence of events. I started with basics and worked up.

From what you said, I assume you disagree with #5.

0110001101101000 wrote:

How to calculate the chances of a coin flip isn't theory or a guess. It's very concrete. After 1 flip there are only 2 possibilities. After 2 flips there are 4. After 3 there are 8.

This isn't a guess or something strange and abstract. This isn't fancy math with no connection to the real world. Lets look at 3 flips (H is for heads, T is for tails). These are the 8 possibilities:

HHHHHTHTHHTTTHHTHTTTHTTT

These are the 8. There is literally nothing else. All are equally likely, so there's a 1 in 8 chance to get one of these.

---

If you flip a coin 10,000 times there are many possibilities (2^10000), but one of them is all H and one of them is all T.

Saying it's impossible is like saying it's impossible to win the lottery... or it's impossible to draw the ace of spades out of a shuffled deck on the first try. It's unlikely, but it's not impossible.

Is this not regarding a seguence of events and the lottery ?

Seems your memory is short.