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

Well I don't care if it's convenient or not, I just care if it makes sense.

Do you actually disagree with what I said or does it just make you mad?

If the body of knowledge stays the same, there is no possibility of an elephant flying.

If it doesn't stay the same, then there is (though it would be minute).

"Lame" or not, I just care whether it's correct. Really it's not lame, though, because it actually clarifies the nature of the disagreement if anything. It shows that I don't disagree with you on the current state of facts, and my disagreement more stems from the limitations of human knowledge.

"Make an assumption, knowledge in the future changes. How can this be refuted?"

Well I'm not assuming that knowledge in the future changes. But I'm saying you can't prove that it won't.

So all I'm really doing is pointing you to the limitations of our knowledge. If our only "real" knowledge is through induction, and induction has limitations, then our knowledge has limitations. So, yeah, I guess if you wanted to "refute" this, you would have to show how we could have absolute certainty. But that burden is on you of course since you're the one claiming this.

Theoretically the phone could ring at any moment but in practice, it's just not happening. I mean, I would need to have children first for that to be possible. :)

And what is that crap anyway? Just automatically call what I say absurd? Ad hominem much?

I have left a note in my will for my 2 1/2 year old grandson to be on the lookout for this forum post, and to give me weekly updates at my grave site.

The immortal thread. The forums could use one.

That a 1300 never will defeat 2700 is believable, but the 1800s does fall from time to time. When I was unrated in høstturneringen 2014, Nordstrand I took down a 1814 (I had achieved norwegian rating, and was ca 700 below him in N-elo. In that game I luckily played the opening very good, better than normal for me, and he got mated in move 78). In the big swiss opens with 400 players and the table split in top and bottom half in the first round, the bottom half might be 600 below, and one or two wins for the bottom half is likely to happen.

When I was below 1300 I messed up in the opening in maybe 60% of the games, but if I could go fine into the middlegame the game was on.

I still as 1461 messes up in openings. I have played three games so far in this years høstturnering, and badly lost all three openings against players 200-400+, therefore i only have 1,5 points.

The 1800s are a lot more experienced, while the 1300s have to figure out a lot more during the game. But when the 1800s are out of theory, their advantage is minimized.At that point the 1300s often are in a bad position, but not always.

When I was 1300, and still, openings are big problems, and my position after 15 moves is so bad that I am forced to almost play like a Magnus to get on top. I must fight with the highest presicion for hours. That situation, being forced to outplay  a lot higher rated players from below do really make the lowrated players improve.

mdinnerspace wrote:

DjonnniDerevnja wrote: That a 1300 never will defeat 2700 is believable, but the 1800s does fall from time to time. When I was unrated in høstturneringen 2014, Nordstrand I took down a 1814 (I had achieved norwegian rating, and was ca 700 below him in N-elo. In that game I luckily played the opening very good, better than normal for me, and he got mated in move 78). In the big swiss opens with 400 players and the table split in top and bottom half in the first round, the bottom half might be 600 below, and one or two wins for the bottom half is likely to happen.

When I was below 1300 I messed up in the opening in maybe 60% of the games, but if I could go fine into the middlegame the game was on.

I still as 1461 messes up in openings. I have played three games so far in this years høstturnering, and badly lost all three openings against players 200-400+, therefore i only have 1,5 points.

The 1800s are a lot more experienced, while the 1300s have to figure out a lot more during the game. But when the 1800s are out of theory, their advantage is minimized.At that point the 1300s often are in a bad position, but not always.

When I was 1300, and still, openings are big problems, and my position after 15 moves is so bad that I am forced to almost play like a Magnus to get on top. I must fight with the highest presicion for hours. That situation, being forced to outplay  a lot higher rated players from below do really make the lowrated players improve. 

Thank you for sharing your views. I had fortunate chance to analyze a otb game played by a strong 1800 fide rated, his game was full of tactical mistakes, I pointed it out to him and he was shock he miss so much in his game, his opponent and my friend miss a lot in the game, they both played the opening poorly and in the middlegame was played aimlessly. My point is even good players ( 1800 fide) are inadequate against experts, there is a quality chess skill that is not on par with players lower than expert level, its chess knowledge attain. I always made this statement, if I ever enter a FIDE rated tournament unrated my worst rating will be at 1900. Right now if  I can improve on my winning ratio on players rated 1900 uscf, 2000 uscf and 2100 uscf, I can go to 2200 uscf; just to go to the next level requires a lot efforted. Chess knowldge gives a player a big advantage, can evaluated a position better, can spot a tactical motif before a your opponent realize it, make better positional decision ( that require chess knowledge) and endgame techinque and knowledge is the ace that give a higher rated player a bigger advantage, you can save a half point or earn a point because of your endgame skills is better. I remember my last chess club game against a 1800 uscf player, I was losing in the endgame, I had the bad bishop, down a pawn and totally lost and I started to play chess and I outplay my opponent and nearly won but drew from a lost position. If I can do this to 1800 uscf what chance does a 1300 uscf have against me? Or better what chance does a 1300 elo have against a 2500 elo GM? Hmmm! Noiticed I never refer to the opening as an advantage, strong players advantage lies in his or her chess knowledge.

Up to 259 pages...I guess when you have nothing better to do....

I dont know uscf rating, but my feeling is that 2000+ Fide players are solid, and so far they have been looking nearly invincible from my side of the board. 1800 players are much more vulnerable.

 I will play an open swiss, Oslo Chess Festival, 9 games starting the 30. Septembre. That will be interesting, and I can test the strenght against a lot of different levels. Unfortunately I am too weak to end up on the top end, where 15 Gms will be sitting, but I will of course try to collect enough points to meet the masterplayers. I think I have ca 1/1000 chance to get to play a GM. I only have to beat a 1900 a 2200  and maybe a 2300 first. I have never beaten anybody above 1814.

@ DjonniDerevnja, you can go up in rating by beating your peers 1400 and below and try to beat 1500 to 1600 elo, you be surprise in rating just doing that.

It will be a very exciting tournament. It will be very difficult both to beat the high- , the low and the unrated players. A lot of unrated and underrated kids are starting, because the schools have autumnholiday. Elham Abdrlauf (11 years old?) is Fide-unrated, with a 2000-strenght rumour, and might be the biggest upset. He won the B-class undefeated with only one draw in Nordstrand Grand Prix in April. My plan is to play slow enough in every single move. If I play slow enough, my chances are ok.

DjonniDerevnja:

   Go through a lot tactical problems and play through Morphy's games and avoid playing any blitz. Blitz develop bad habits, moving on impulse is one of them. Good luck and hope go to the next rating level, 1500 elo.  Or higher!

Blitz affords the oppertunity to play many games. Review mistakes. Move 11 a mistake. Next game play a better move, only to play a mistake on move 13. And so on...

Discard the opening if not working.

OTB great. If you can afford the $ and time.

Blitz ? Just maintain the proper perspective.

Analyzing blitz is learning from mistakes, longchess is learning by analyzing during the gamesituation, and  after. I think blitz can be good for learning openings, but myself I have to avoid it in the last weeks before a big tournament, because I have problems with putting on the brakes. I have lost to many games blitzing out a move, sometimes only one move have been blitzed out too fast.

Is there any chance this thread can win the most disccussed one? Been here for year and half not sure if i saw one.

Of course. Just use a baseball bat. Then, while wasting away in prison, you can hone your chess skills without acquiring a rating that reveals your strength. Once paroled with an old 1300 rating from your youth, you can breakfast on 2700s because they cannot handle the sort of crazy chess that prisoners play.

Isn't it possible to die in any room also? I remember hearing something like, since molecules are random, all the oxygen molecules/atoms could just happen to gather in one corner where you can't breathe them in. But it would be some 1 in 1000000000000000000000000 kind of chance. I'm not sure if I remember it right though.

It is quite impossible is for Elubas to accept somethings can not, will not, can never happen.

Die in a room because all the oxygen molecules gather in 1 side of the room? While he's in the opposite side unable to breath, I'll lend him my scuba tank that I carry around for just such chanch occurrences.