Not blitz but I'll take the challenge in an online game. Unrated of course.
Is there any chance that a 1300 rated player can beat a 2700 rated player?
Sort:
please let us know about the results, Scott!
Well, blitz is different. In bullet I've lost plenty of games where my opponent blundered their queen, perhaps for a minor piece or something, and vice versa. And these were against people of a similar rating to my own.
Anyway, my point was that it's a little rude to just say things like "Even if that 1300 player is up a queen, he's too stupid to understand what to do with it." I would just say the 1300 might not have enough technique to win it based on the pressures of facing a stronger player, but we do not need to call names to every 1300 player out there.
Oct 24, 2012
0
#665
Fine guys, some experimentation has cost me "precious" rating points - but I'm here to report the results.
I was arrogant enough to try queen odds against a 1530 in blitz rating, in 3 0 time control. Fell thoroughly on my face and got checkmated down a Q three times out of three - it should be commented, each time with less than 3 seconds remaining to my talented opponent at time of checkmate!
This was interesting. Then I tried the same 'manipulative' game against a 1330+ blitz rating - and this time I managed to pull a 4:1 victory - pretty convincing, I'd say.
If it's regular time controls, I don't know if I can actually beat them - but certainly it's not going to be as much time as I'll actually suffer all that time playing down a Q - it's not fun, you know... except when it's over quickly.
I beat 1900 players at my local chess club. I dont mind playing high rated players. I don't fear thy ratings.
Oct 24, 2012
0
#667
ClavierCavalier wrote:
FEDTEL wrote:
Expertise87 wrote:
What do you think is more likely? My being elected President in the upcoming United States presidential election or you beating Kramnik in a chess game?
The upcoming election candidates have already been decided so your chance is 0% (you are not an option), so of course me beating kramnik is more likely, and if he makes the same blunder as in fritz match then it should be easy for me.
yet you have a chance in the 2016 US presidential election as long as you satisfy qualifications. good luck!
It doesn't matter though since the popular vote has no effect on the presidential election. It's the electoral college that isn't going to vote for him, unless he uncovers their identities and bribes them handsomely. Sure, the electoral college is supposed to vote based on the popular vote, but it doesn't really apply.
Electors are chosen in open meetings, and all of their names are available. Each state chooses its own electors based upon the vote in that state. A write in candidate can win the electoral vote if he or she has electors available in each state that he or she wins. In my state, the Republican Party chooses electors at their local conventions, and the Democratic Party does the same. My state is expected to choose to reelect the President, and so the Republican electors can expect to stay home when the college meets.
Most states have laws preventing electors from going against the majority, so the rogue vote cast for Ronald Reagan in 1976 (Mike Padden was the "faithless elector") has become far less likely. Padden currently serves in the state senate.
solskytz wrote:
Fine guys, some experimentation has cost me "precious" rating points - but I'm here to report the results.
I was arrogant enough to try queen odds against a 1530 in blitz rating, in 3 0 time control. Fell thoroughly on my face and got checkmated down a Q three times out of three - it should be commented, each time with less than 3 seconds remaining to my talented opponent at time of checkmate!
This was interesting. Then I tried the same 'manipulative' game against a 1330+ blitz rating - and this time I managed to pull a 4:1 victory - pretty convincing, I'd say.
If it's regular time controls, I don't know if I can actually beat them - but certainly it's not going to be as much time as I'll actually suffer all that time playing down a Q - it's not fun, you know... except when it's over quickly.
I wish to apologize to you - you openly admit defeat. Other parts of your profile do look impressive.
sorry for my comment. But Brussels is still the capital of Belgium.
Oct 24, 2012
0
#669
Right - it certainly is :-) got to find a moment to change my country settings - right you are :-)
The 1300 vs the grandmaster has about the same chance as a 10 yr old vs a heavyweight boxer...
Wait, solskytz forgot what country he lived in?
Oct 24, 2012
0
#672
no, just couldn't be bothered to update the profile completely on change, and maybe expected that as he changed city into "Brussels", the system will take care of the country... whatever...
[COMMENT DELETED]
Bartleby73 wrote:
well, there is still that incident with Daryll Johansen... he apparently lost to a 1000 ish player.
Im pretty sure the person was 1300 from memory. Also Johansen is only 2400-2500 somewhere. Super GMs destroy 2500s easily, that 200 points is a huge gap, and it was incredible even a lower GM lost.
Obviously there is a chance, but is it a chance that is likely to EVER occur? no.
About the same chance as a toddler has big wave riding?
Oct 25, 2012
0
#677
Of course there is a (mathematical) chance since both are human and thus make errors 
But I think you'd win in lottery more often than beat a GM...
Oct 25, 2012
0
#678
Well, I'm not exactly an 1300 myself, and NM AJ Goldsby is certainly not an 2700, but still I thought I'd post a nice game here from several hours ago, a 3 0 which I played against him (and no queen odds, of course)
This player was rated 110 poinst higher than me before the game - and I was quite excited to play him as it's the first time, and it's actually a guy I know...
The opening was a 2. c3 sicilian.
I don't always play that, but sometimes I do. Sometimes I get crushed, but there are traps and pitfalls - which Goldsby expertly sidestepped.
One of the crucial points of this opening, is that white gets quite easily a 3:2 pawn majority on the Q-side. This can prove beneficial for him in an eventual endgame, and so he's very happy to play around with his pieces in the center, posting knights and bishops on d4, sometimes on e5, going for exchanges, which hasten his strategical aim.
I thought that maybe AJ didn't know all that, as he was not averse to exchanges, and soon a rook ending was reached.
"Exchange that last rook, Mr. Goldsby, please" I thought... and he moved it a way, irritatingly.
Still, I had my majority and started to centralize my pieces - kind and rook.
AJ blockaded all advances from me, created counter play on the other side, and suddenly had a protected passed pawn on e4!
Oh my! The tables had turned! What will I do now? Now after an exchange, with my isolated passer on the b-file, I will just be lost - he will simply pick it up with his king and then beat me!
I've been doing some endgame training on chesstempo lately - very recommended! And I could really see the benefits in this game, which was undoubtedly going to become a defeat at the hands of the experienced master...
but in some way or another, suddenly my king found its way to his side of the board! The hell with the e-pawn, he seemed to say...
Goldsby didn't waste a moment! He invaded my queenside with his rook, advanced his king and started to guide his own passer home.
I did a chesstempo move, which I wouldn't do before in this kind of position, and put my rook on b4, right behind the pawn. I thought he had a sea of checks and at least a draw - but Goldsby saw more, and understood that he won't get far by checking. He kept advancing the pawn - and not only I've won the race (I was afraid that he'll find a way to sacrifice his rook for my passer and win with his extra K-side pawns, which I'll be powerless to stop), I also came out a fresh, unexchangable queen ahead!
Goldsby didn't manage to promote his pawn, and in the last possible minute (with a rook on my home base, protected by his almost-arrived passer, and challenging my own rook on the same rank - a familiar situation for losing players!) succumbed to a series of well thought-out checks by my new queen, at the end decisively adding another challenger to his queening square - the queen.
At this point Goldsby tried to flag and confuse me by quick moves, tricky moves etc. - but to no avail. I just had too much time and was too cool in my head. Now I knew I was winning, and so it was.
Here's the game - for good or for worse (where was I lost? I never looked - some people say that you don't analyze blitz)
[Event "Live Chess"]
[Site "Chess.com"]
[Date "2012.10.25"]
[Round "?"]
[White "solskytz"]
[Black "FLchessplayer"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteElo "1854"]
[BlackElo "1950"]
[TimeControl "3|0"]
[Termination "solskytz won by resignation"]
1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.d4 Bg4 6.Be2 e6 7.Na3 O-O-O 8.dxc5 Qxd1+ 9.Bxd1 Bxc5 10.Nc2 Nf6 11.O-O h6 12.Be3 Be7 13.Ncd4 Nxd4 14.Bxd4 Kb8 15.h3 Bh5 16.Ne5 Bxd1 17.Raxd1 Rhf8 18.Nc4 g6 19.Be5+ Ka8 20.f3 h5 21.Kf2 Nd5 22.Ne3 Bc5 23.Bd4 Bxd4 24.Rxd4 Nxe3 25.Kxe3 Rxd4 26.Kxd4 Kb8 27.Rf2 Rd8+ 28.Ke3 Kc7 29.Rd2 Rb8 30.Ke4 f6 31.Rd4 b5 32.b3 Kc6 33.a3 a6 34.c4 Rb7 35.cxb5+ Rxb5 36.b4 a5 37.Rc4+ Kd6 38.g3 e5 39.f4 f5+ 40.Ke3 e4 41. Rd4+ Ke6 42.Rc4 axb4 43.axb4 Rb6 44.Kd4 Rd6+ 45.Kc5 Rd5+ 46.Kc6 Rd3 47.b5 Rxg3 48.Rb4 Rc3+ 49.Kb7 e3 50.b6 Kd5 51.Rb1 Kd4 52.Ka8 Ra3+ 53.Kb8 Kd3 54. b7 e2 55.Kc8 Rc3+ 56.Kd7 Ke3 57.b8=Q Rd3+ 58.Ke6 Rd1 59.Qb6+ Kf3 60.Qb3+ Kxf4 61.Rxd1 exd1=Q 62.Qxd1 g5 63.Qd4+ Kg3 64.Kxf5 g4 65.hxg4 h4 66.g5 h3 67.Qg1+ Kh4 68.g6 h2 69.Qh1 Kg3 70.g7 Kf2 71.g8=Q 1-0
Missing some mates-in-1 at the end, with seconds on my clock and Goldsby expertly trying to flag me - I thought, ok - just blockade one pawn, queen another, and no stalemates please - no time to look - such is life at the 3 0 zone, when you're lagging somewhat..
Goldsby is rated by the USCF, something like 2250. He was Florida Champion numerous times, is a chess coach and publicist and wins local tournaments regularly, with many experts and masters as his victims.
Also he 'fails' to rise above 2000 in chess.com blitz ratings - just to give you guys some sense of proportion.
Oct 25, 2012
0
#679
FEDTEL wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
ClavierCavalier wrote:
It doesn't matter though since the popular vote has no effect on the presidential election. It's the electoral college that isn't going to vote for him, unless he uncovers their identities and bribes them handsomely. Sure, the electoral college is supposed to vote based on the popular vote, but it doesn't really apply.
Electors are chosen in open meetings, and all of their names are available. Each state chooses its own electors based upon the vote in that state. A write in candidate can win the electoral vote if he or she has electors available in each state that he or she wins. In my state, the Republican Party chooses electors at their local conventions, and the Democratic Party does the same. My state is expected to choose to reelect the President, and so the Republican electors can expect to stay home when the college meets.
Most states have laws preventing electors from going against the majority, so the rogue vote cast for Ronald Reagan in 1976 (Mike Padden was the "faithless elector") has become far less likely. Padden currently serves in the state senate.
Tank you for your "prolonged articles" on the US election, yet that doesn't mean that 1300 beating 2700 is impossible.
No. You are correct. This slight correction to ClavierCavalier's otherwise informative post, his post, and the rant that provoked it are all equally irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
The chances of a 1300 prevailing have been addressed in great detail, and they approach zero. Statistically, however, zero is akin to Zeno's arrow: the human eye may not be capable of perceiving the gap between the arrow's tip and the target, but contact has not been made.
The 1300 has an infinitesimally small chance. There are those who choose to bet on him nonetheless.
Somebody in this thread wanted to challenge me. On trying to challenge him I only see times for moves measured in days... I was talking blitz, something in the order of 5 0 or 3 0. I don't really know how to give Q odds in these times, but I guess I'll just take her out and throw her at a pawn or something..