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

I think a 2300 has good chances against a 2700.  The 2700 more often will win, there will be a lot of draws, and some times the 2300 will win. Imagine the 2700 playing with black against the 2300. Not easy at all. 

The kids does some bad and some fantastic tournaments. Andreas Garberg Tryggestad and Tor Fredrik Kaasen are all over the 2100-2400 ratinglist. I think Tor Fredrik dropped all the way down to  1927  right before Oslo Chess Festival, and then he suddendly jumped to  2389 and took an IM-bite. He took fifth place , behind three GMs and in front of 5 GMs and a lot other players.

http://tournamentservice.com/standings.aspx?TID=OsloChessFestival-Masters2016-NordstrandSjakklubb_2

I actually once beat a GM by checkmate.

you have?

Why is this thread still alive?

Someone please close this.

i once drew a GM.  The picture won second place in my art class

Good one.       Where did all of these gorgeous, female chess players come from, all of the sudden.   When I was young, the only girls that played chess were nerd girls, with black-rimmed glasses.   Nowadays, they're all drop dead gorgeous.   I love it.  

I can beat them all

Many of them comes from Tromsø. In Norway there are  fantastic girls playing chess. We have some in Nordstrand too, but unfortunately they are few. It used to be less than 10 % girls, but I think we have a slight increase. 

Its a nice chat. Especially I like the answer below you, from greenibex.  :)

i like painting

show us your work!

I like drawing abstracts.   I tried to post one of my drawings on here, but it's a bitmap and it won't let me post that format.   :/

Maybe,with a whole lot of luck.

The 2300 player might for some non-chess related reason have to leave the game and the 1300 win by default or on time. 

If a 1300 can beat a 1400 and a 1400 can beat a 1500 and a 1500 can beat a 1600... and a 2600 can beat a 2700, then by the transitive property of equality, a 1300 can beat a 2700!!!

I look at it this way.  A 2700 will beat a 2300 (99% of the time) and a 2300 will beat a 2000 and a 2000 will beat a 1700 and a 1700 will beat a 1300, so the 1300 has almost no chance against a 2700.   But miracles do happen.   lol

How did Jesus get into this conversation?   Anyway, if Jesus played chess, He would be rated 10,000, not 1300.   

I haven't read all the posts (has anyone??), so there's a chance this has already been suggested, but if the 2700 player has a heart attack during the match.  

My opponent in some of my games where he's been a Q or more down must have been waiting for this to happen to me. 

This is really not a very good argument.  Chess is not mathematics and the transitive property does not apply fully to chess ratings, not even in the back-to-front way that is suggested here.

Red merges seamlessy into orange, which merges seamlessly into yellow, which merges seamlessly into green ... blue ... indigo ...   So how is it that we have an obvious discontinuity between the two ends of the spectrum?

Is this so very different from the "Spectrum of Chess ratings"?

We do not even need to consider the extremes of ability. Even at GM level we see cases where player A usually beats higher rated player B and player B usually beats higher rated player C, yet C usually beats A.