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

PhoenixTTD

I think a 1300 is rated too high to have a chance.  His "chess knowledge" would get in the way of him accidentally playing a good game.  A 200 rated player has a small theoretical chance.

RetiFan
PhoenixTTD wrote:

I think a 1300 is rated too high to have a chance.  His "chess knowledge" would get in the way of him accidentally playing a good game.  A 200 rated player has a small theoretical chance.

lol, so what must 1300 rated player should do is to lose games rapidly, so he can have a chance against 2700.

Ziryab
PhoenixTTD wrote:

I think a 1300 is rated too high to have a chance.  His "chess knowledge" would get in the way of him accidentally playing a good game.  A 200 rated player has a small theoretical chance.

Nonsense. A 1300s chess knowledge consists mostly of faulty ideas buttressed by the ability to spot two move tactics.

ClavierCavalier
Ziryab wrote:
PhoenixTTD wrote:

I think a 1300 is rated too high to have a chance.  His "chess knowledge" would get in the way of him accidentally playing a good game.  A 200 rated player has a small theoretical chance.

Nonsense. A 1300s chess knowledge consists mostly of faulty ideas buttressed by the ability to spot two move tactics.

An older man like yourself should be able to relate to someone thinking they know everything after they gain a bit of knowledge.  Maybe you don't have teenagers?  :-p

Ziryab
ClavierCavalier wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
PhoenixTTD wrote:

I think a 1300 is rated too high to have a chance.  His "chess knowledge" would get in the way of him accidentally playing a good game.  A 200 rated player has a small theoretical chance.

Nonsense. A 1300s chess knowledge consists mostly of faulty ideas buttressed by the ability to spot two move tactics.

An older man like yourself should be able to relate to someone thinking they know everything after they gain a bit of knowledge.  Maybe you don't have teenagers?  :-p

I do. My teenagers are now in their 20s, which has raised my IQ slightly in their eyes, although they remain deeply skeptical of all that I claim to know.

I also remember when I thought I was a pretty hot chess player because a good tournament pushed me up to 1525. OTOH, September 2010 was the last time I lost to a player under 1600 in a tournament, and that player was 1602 after the event was rated.

PhoenixTTD
RetiFan wrote:
PhoenixTTD wrote:

I think a 1300 is rated too high to have a chance.  His "chess knowledge" would get in the way of him accidentally playing a good game.  A 200 rated player has a small theoretical chance.

lol, so what must 1300 rated player should do is to lose games rapidly, so he can have a chance against 2700.

It is not so much the score but the knowlege that gets that score.  A monkey who knows how to play has every move as a candidate move.  However someone who knows a little has a few candidate moves every turn.  His limited knowlege will elimanate moves he needs to make.  So that person will not have the theorectical chance to make all the correct moves.

edit:  Basically what I am saying is if you put all the legal moves into a hat and randomly picked one you have a small chance.  However if a 1300 tries to come up with the best moves based on how he plays chess...then all the moves are not in the hat and he loses every time.

WalangAlam

In March 28, 2011 Anand lost to a 10 yr old junior player from Uzbekistan in a simul match. The Teenager was rated 1900. Check out the article in chessvibes.com

Anand loses to youngster in Uzbek simul

Here is the game. Anand, Viswanathan vs Igonin, Temur 0-1 Simul 2011.3.28

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. Nf3Nge7 6. O-O O-O 7. d3 d6 8. Rb1 f5 9. Bd2 h6 10. b4 g5 11. b5 Nd4 12. Nxd4 exd4 13. Nd5 Nxd5 14. Bxd5+ Kh8 15. a4 f4 16. a5 Rb8 17. Qc2 Bh3 18. Rfc1 fxg3 19. hxg3 Qf6 20. Be1 h5 21. c5 h4 22. cxd6 hxg3 23. f3 Qxd6 24. Be4 Qf4 25. Bd2 Qh426. e3 Bg2 0-1

Estragon
topman75 wrote:

In March 28, 2011 Anand lost to a 10 yr old junior player from Uzbekistan in a simul match. The Teenager was rated 1900. Check out the article in chessvibes.com

Anand loses to youngster in Uzbek simul

Here is the game. Anand, Viswanathan vs Igonin, Temur 0-1 Simul 2011.3.28

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. Nf3Nge7 6. O-O O-O 7. d3 d6 8. Rb1 f5 9. Bd2 h6 10. b4 g5 11. b5 Nd4 12. Nxd4 exd4 13. Nd5 Nxd5 14. Bxd5+ Kh8 15. a4 f4 16. a5 Rb8 17. Qc2 Bh3 18. Rfc1 fxg3 19. hxg3 Qf6 20. Be1 h5 21. c5 h4 22. cxd6 hxg3 23. f3 Qxd6 24. Be4 Qf4 25. Bd2 Qh426. e3 Bg2 0-1

If the kid had been 1400, you might have a point.

WalangAlam

Yes obviously. But if the Thread was changed to " Can a 1900 rated kid beat a world champ?" would that be a yes? 

ponz111

Is there any chance that a 1300 rated player could beat a 2700 rated player"

Of course there is a "chance".  I once was attacked by a kick boxer and two other guys and I cam out on top.  Most anything is possible.

I would guess it has already happened in a simul.

0ort

I think you're missing the point. It's not that a 1300 player is worse than a random move generator but that a 1300 will never beat a 2700 because the 1300 will always make roughly 1300 level type moves whereas at least a random move generator has a (minisculely) small chance of randomly emulating 2700 level play

Ziryab

Magnus became a GM at the age of 13. He was over 2500 then.

plutonia
0ort wrote:

I think you're missing the point. It's not that a 1300 player is worse than a random move generator but that a 1300 will never beat a 2700 because the 1300 will always make roughly 1300 level type moves whereas at least a random move generator has a (minisculely) small chance of randomly emulating 2700 level play

 

you clearly have no idea of the game tree complexity of chess.

0ort

well that was why I wrote miniscule! :) Admittedly you'd have to run the random move generator for much longer than the estimated life span of the universe but...

plutonia

Ahah, you have a point then!

now that I think about it a 1300 player has many chances to make moves that worsen his position. E.g. overextending pawns, going for silly attacks, etc.

0ort

exactly! as the person who originally made the point said, a little knoweledge can be a dangerous thing!

arcaneterrain

To quote Dumb and Dumber:

Lloyd: What do you think the chances are of a guy like you and a girl like me... ending up together?
Mary: Well, Lloyd, that's difficult to say. I mean, we don't really...
Lloyd: Hit me with it! Just give it to me straight! I came a long way just to see you, Mary. The least you can do is level with me. What are my chances?
Mary: Not good.
Lloyd: You mean, not good like one out of a hundred?
Mary: I'd say more like one out of a million.
[pause]
Lloyd: So you're telling me there's a chance... *YEAH!*

Ziryab
arcaneterrain wrote:

To quote Dumb and Dumber:

Lloyd: What do you think the chances are of a guy like you and a girl like me... ending up together?
Mary: Well, Lloyd, that's difficult to say. I mean, we don't really...
Lloyd: Hit me with it! Just give it to me straight! I came a long way just to see you, Mary. The least you can do is level with me. What are my chances?
Mary: Not good.
Lloyd: You mean, not good like one out of a hundred?
Mary: I'd say more like one out of a million.
[pause]
Lloyd: So you're telling me there's a chance... *YEAH!*

And a much better chance than our friend the 1300 in his ambition to knock off one of the top 51 players in the world.

Elubas

Once again, although there is a possible disadvantage that the 1300 would have compared to the RMG, there are also advantages to being a 1300 as well. For example, a 1300 would be more likely to exploit extremely simple blunders. Moreover, he might find a great move, even if it was for the wrong reasons.

So although there was a valid concern raised about the 1300 not having the moves in the hat to make the right move, you can't know if it would actually apply, without making assumptions.

And of course, I also have to make assumptions or guesses when it comes to my opinion.

lefouissimo13

Similar to the chances of Jamaica beating Canada at ice hockey I'd say....you would need 20 canadian players to freakishly break their legs in the first quarter, and then see if Jamaica could catch up a 40 odd goal defecit with no opposition in 45 minutes. Would love to see that!