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

I think about the only chance is to catch him out with an opening novelty which the GM doesn't know or underestimates. Anything over 10 moves and the 1300 wll be so far behind he wont be able to win with an extra queen.

My probability function also says that the chances are decreasing when game is getting longer and longer. But the problem is finding an underestimated novelty against 2700 rated player is probably harder, they just memorize the moves of the opening you choose .

Nevertheless, if there is a moment to strike at the GM, it is at the opening .

@RetiFan, I'm not convinced that the ELO expectancy curve means much at the extremes. You can use it to roughly predict the score between a 2700 and a 2500 (75-25), but between a 2700 and a 1300 the curve is so close to straightening out that it may as well be straight.

I'm wondering:

Will the 1300 have a better chance if:

1. He really tries to play his best and carefully considers every move
2. He tries to blitz his way through, mybe making a few good moves he would have discarded f he thought about tem.

"This whole topic is just silly. Just because something is theoretically possible , it doesnt mean it can actually happen."

Ok, I fully admit this is pure trolling, but, I think when you say "can actually happen," you really mean "will actually happen," right? Because "theoretically possible" is defined in that it can happen.

Again, I'm trying to be annoying on purpose, so don't take it personally :)

Unfortunately, let Tails be T and Heads be H:

I threw a coin 18 times. The sequence THTTHHTHHHTTHTHTTH, in this order, have 1/(2^18) chance of appearing, but this was what has happened! So I don't buy your explanation either.

Also, I don't see the point in calling it zero chance. There is a big difference between 0 and 0.000125, what is it you ask? Hope I say, a purpose for 1300 rated player to play harder and harder. What does 0 chance say? Just pack your things and leave, chess is for 2000+ only.

.000125 is 1 in 8000? I don't believe a 1300 will win one in 8000 agains a gm.

There are 1500 GMs, about, i think. Many of them play regular simuls to earn cash, if they are not at the top level it's one of the few ways "lesser" gms can earn some cash. There must be 1000's of games of GM's playing low rates. If a 1300 wins, that game will go viral, everybody will know about it. But it's not happening...... and we're not even talking about games in tournament conditions.

Maybe I should change the thing on my profile to say "uknown murderer"

The forum discussions would be a lot more interesting (Dude_3 aka the unkown murderer correcting me...)lol

Exactly.

It is like choosing a random number out of a bag of numbers -10000000000000000000000 through 10000000000000000000000, w. the decimals to the 15th place, and be surprised when you pick out something because "there is only an extremely small chance of getting this number ________!!!!!!!"

There is still chance, yet not likely.

I think there is a chance.....said it before.....maybe the 2700 player is having a bad hair day!!!!    hahahahahaha

Anand is rated around 2800, but he sporadically loses to players rated 2000 when ge gives simul exhibitions. But there's no way he'd lose to 1300, IMO... Even if he was playing without a queen to start with, he still should win.

+1

The Universe is huge and old, and its only getting bigger and older. Anything that isn't strictly imposible has probably happened countless times already.

Our planet orbits a single star, our star is 1 in a billion in our galaxy. Our galaxy is 1 in a billion in the observable universe. These are a drunken man's rough estimations, but the point remains. If it is possible, it happens. 

If an omniscient being had commented on the odds of this exact debate occuring in some far flung corner of the Universe countless millenia ago, he would have considered it close to zilch.

Look at us now. 

This discusstion is over, I've already written the huge 0'ed percent, want me to write it again?

Basically, you have a much better chance of living until you are 1000 than a 1300 beating a 2700 unless the 2700 is provisional or the 1300 is cheating.

18 moves I could see, 17 moves... Pffffttttt

Surely one can do anything with his dedication and hardwork.

In india a small 7 yrs old unrated child have defeated a GM. Superb na. And now he is rated 2234 at just 9 yrs.

They were likely better than 1300 at unrated.

Possible? yes.

the typical 1300 could not beat a typical gm though. Great question. I wonder things like that myself. :)