I think if there is 300 ELO point difference between two players it's no point playing the game. Practically the player with lower ELO has 0 winning chance.
I won against a guy rated 509 points ahead of me. With black. After 23 moves.
There have been upsets of1000 or so points rating difference (my personal record is 600-700). However, as previously stated, once you get to a 1400 point difference with a game between a master and an amateur the chances are insignificant.
(btw, 1/infinity is 0 as a limit, 'cause infinity's not actually a number)
I know that I just stated that it's not pointless to play someone 300 points higher.
I played a four game match (game 4 went unplayed) against an opponent 500 points higher (1738 to 2257) He is a FIDE Master whose rating has been dropping slowly from his peak slightly over 2400. I closed half of the rating gap with 40 hours of preparation made possible by my opponent's narrow opening repertoire. He simply showed up and played. My draw in the third game was hard-earned. Special pleading on the part of the tournament director was needed to get the event (our city championship) rated by the USCF.
The score of 2 1/2 - 1/2 was considered a great victory by the losing player.
Now, let's go back to considering how our 1300 patzer will secure a win against one of the top 50 players in the world.
you never now if that happens no matter if it was like a .1 to 99.9ect. mabye.
Yeah, a player rated 1300 can beat easily à 2700 rated player................ in poker!!! LOL
verse is poetry
won is past tense of win, but we don't win people playing chess
et cetera is abbreviated etc (&c if you are living in the nineteenth century)
ellipses are three dots ...
We don't won people, either.
It always bothers me when people say "And et cetera." Like ATM Machine.
If the 2700 opponent is Ivanchuk, there may be a chance. That guy is unpredictable.
Ivanchuk is sloppy enough to possibly lose to a 2000 once in a blue moon if he did something incredibly daft. But not to a 1300. He could drop a piece and still win against a 1300.
All the threads that get closed around here for no apparent reason, and this one is still alive and well?
I don't see why it should be closed. There's nothing wrong with nobody posting on it for a long period of time, but if someone does want to post here I don't see why they should be restricted.
Yes indeed -- Freedom to Post, mindlessly (or not).
It's a God-given right, on the interweb at least.
Well...there is How Fast Can You Get This Forum Locked, and its alive and well and has almost 3000 posts and has been around for a long time.
3000? How does that compare to (ex?)Daeth's?
lol...my sentiments exactly.
I don't see why it should be closed.
I don't think that's exactly the point that Smitty was trying to make...
Actually even if your are such a player, and if you get a win against a 2700 when you were 1300, you become a Radjabov, or even better, which is exceptionally rare.
Don't have time to read all 49 pages but at tournaments I have seen 1600 players beat 2200 players, 1800 players beat 2300 players and I know an A-class player who drew with a GM once.
Consistently play at that level, well DUH not likely - otherwise they wouldn't have such low ratings!
But you have to remember that there are several types of lower rated players. Those that are moving up, those who are stable, and those who are over rated.
My nephew once lost a game to Nakamura...N's rating at the time was about 1300.
Their nephew's was 557... :-p
Which type of chess are you talking about? I only play online chess and would suggest to you that playing that format, the answer would be -
But the question isn't could a 1600 ever beat a 2200, it is could a 1300 ever beat a 2700? A million examples of lesser upsets wouldn't change the question.
Holy mackerel. I didn't know this thread was still around.
There's a chance if the 1300 is actually a master-level player who is simply underrated.
But otherwise, the chance is very slim to none.