FREE - In Google Play
FREE - in Win Phone Store
I just noticed that 1300 and 2700 add up to an even 4000.
The fact that it is evenly divisible by 1, 10, 100 and 1000 means, yes, you can beat a 2700 under certain circumstances.
Number Theory, right?
the 1300 player could be better, but not play online as much.
also the 2700 player could make a bad mistake.
Maybe,if the 1300 player's coach taught him a stratagy that is played only like 4 times in chess history and than,Maybe the 1300 player will win.But only in a small chance
after 10 beers maybe
I get careless and lose to people I could normally easily beat. I imagine this would happen less for the grand masters, but it is possible.
Should you get a chance and a queen and land,
Priests and knights and folks to command,
What's stopping you from beating the world,
Since all you need is inside your hand?
You can have a chance and a queen and land,
If you're not a king as a real king is,
Then all you have will be dusts in sand.
Possible: Yes.Likely: No.Simplest answer.
The biggest chance will be if the 1300 player is a sand begger and the 2700 player just stopped playing turnaments for 10 years,than there might be a big chance there
I'm not even sure then. Didn't Kasparov say Fischer was playing around 2500-2600 range when he returned to face Spassky again? Wasn't that around 20 years after Fischer stopped? He was the first 2700+ player, so a 10 year gap wasn't enough to drop him past the 2000 mark.
ClavierCavalier,I said "the 1300 could be a sand begger" a sand begger is someone is someone who loses on purpes to get to a lower rating,then to win in low rated turnaments and get the money.So the sand begger might of droped from 2800 to 1300 on purpes to win money,so that I said "maybe the 2700 didn't play in turnaments in 10 years" isn't really importent,It's just like the chance that a 2800 will win a 2700.
The first diagram demonstrates how a 1300 player handles an advantage against a 1900.
Of course, he would be more relaxed and play better moves after a blunder by a member of the WORLD TOP FIFTY.
Oh, I guess that evens the odds. Actually,a sand begger could be one who should challenge Carlsen but their actual rating is 657. This gives some better odds for the 1300's!
Please, please let this thread die.
I've prayed, I've cajoled, I've even written a letter to my congressman...nothing seems to work.
I remember the times that this topic had just started and I was thinking like, yeah interesting topic but there's not much to say other than some statistics and "if the GM gets poisoned" jokes. Seems that I was wrong.
This thread refuses to die... but we can actually test it... ask Fabiano Caruana 2754 (who is chess.com member) for a 15|0 match...
On a more serious note did you see how Fab destroyed one of the CMs on this site in a 10min blitz, it was like playing with a child. It looked like my uncle playing with his 5yr old nephew. He read whites strategy from a mile away and dismantled him with amazing ease. And thats a 1900 rated blitz player BTW, imagine a 1300 rated player?!!
Anyway it goes to tell you how much more skilled a GM is. As Kasparov once said "when a GM looks at a position he sees his old girlfriend, an average player sees the nose hairs"
It has happend but it is so rare. Just see the fishing pole trap (though that was a simul
Aha, the old alcohol handicap! One beer before the game for every 100 points rating difference perhaps?
When has it happened? Who was the 2700+ player who lost, and do you have the moves?
A blunder like loosing queen for pawn is probably not enought for 1300vs 2700, maybe 5 blunders is enough though