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

No doubt, Person could forget game

@chessplayersuper

Its not just any match it is THE match. i suspect croatia fan

Anyone can lose at speed chess. OTB Standard time controls are different than speed. If Magnus is given a short enough amount of time and a 1300 long enough, results could be handicapped to 50-50. But that’s not chess, it’s handicapped time controls. Big difference than OTB standard where a 1300 would have ZERO chance.  

In a 90|30? Not at all. The 2700 could probably win with queen odds

based on statistics the chances are 0.000000034%

there is a chance if the 2700 player lack sleep or something

The 2700 might die during the game...

2700 fide? No chance. GM? Case demonstrated with 4 year old vs great GM

it is so possible

In a one or two minute game there is a serious chance that a GM flags. In a G/120 with a second time control there is literally zero chance. 

Players rated 1300 on-line can be very good players who just mess around. I’m 2020USCF and my online rating is like 1400-1600. So online ratings don’t mean anything. However, a competitive tournament rating of 1300 means a player still lacks certain basic tactical understanding. 

2200 OTB players understand all of these tactics but fall victim to these tactics by 2400 & 2500 who outmaneuver them. 

2700 players eat 2500 players for lunch.

So the answer is 0.000000000%

If you guys want to argue this point further it might be better to ask “What’s the chance a 2000 player can beat a 2700?” 

((I know a lot about chess, seriously... and I’m absolutely sure I CAN NOT draw one of these guys. No way. It’s simply not possible. But, what are a 2000-2100 odds against a 2700?

1 in 10,000,000? 

1 in 100,000,000?

Even this: http://www.petke.info/RndChess/ totally random playing chess engine can win 2700 rated player. 

because the question is if REAL 1300 (not messing around, but plays really as strong as 1300, not more) can win REAL 2700 (the same not messing around). I mean, the game they play stronger player should play on 2700 level of play and 1300 should play on 1300 level play.

As for me it's impossible to win, playing true 1300 level of play to beat someone playing true 2700 level of play.

I googled this the other day and found a chart that shows the % chance of winning when the difference in ratings is a certain amount. It basically breaks down to...

• 100 rating points is ~65%
• 200 is ~75%
• 300 is ~85%
• 400 is ~92%
• 500 is ~96%
• 600 is ~98%
• 700 is ~99%
• 735 is 100%

Because 2700-1300 = 1400 point difference, which falls into the category of that last bullet, the chances of the 2700 winning are 100%.

xDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD you are killing it on every topic mate

No. Then 2700's chance of winning is 198% lol.

Yeah. If his/her little sibling who has no idea how to play logs on and plays for him/her.

Maybe a game here and there but if you’re talking about playing over 30 matches you’re not going to have more wins than they will against you.

The highest I ever beat somebody was 2100+. I also have only been probably five people above 2000.

Those numbers are taken from statistical data; that's probability based on statistics; which is not  exactly the same as probability based on mathematics.  The 1300 could mathematically stand a non-zero chance; similar to if you put enough monkeys in a room full of typewriters one of them is bound to write King Lear.