ASpieboy wrote:
Remember when Chess.com went up against Julio Becerra, who is arguably the best non-cheating player here? We barely managed a draw. Carlsen is 10 times as powerful as Becerra.
Well I don't know about that...
Magnus Carlsen
Sort:
Simendo wrote:
I know some patzers that have beaten Magnus Carlsen, but that was over 10 years ago :P...
you guys are idiots...
every1 here engines, even so they CANNOT beat Carlsen.. you see Kasparov? he drew the engine and beat it (as so did kramnik etc..) and imagine him having 3 days to think instead of minutes?
obviously he would never (he as in Carlsen) lose to the engine.. if Top level gms are beating the engine OTB (sometimes losing but who cares) and mostly drawing OTB then imagine CC? 3 days to move will automatically make Carlsen stronger then the engine (unless of course the engine use makes the engine think for hours straight) then they would be drawing alot.
No. No one on this site can beat Carlsen OTB, and no one on this site who doesn't use an engine could beat him at CC either.
Nov 9, 2009
0
#66
SerbianChessStar wrote:
goldendog wrote:
You're thinking of Magnet Carlsen. Yeah he's terrible.
That he is playing like rybka with over 3100+ performance rating?
Actually it wasn't over 3100, it was just over 3000, so that definately means that NOLAUPT would be able to crush him. 
Top 'players' on Chess.com are all cheats and are not even titled OTB (with few exceptions), i.e. not even 2300 (Fide Master). Considering that Carlsen is 2800 that's a 500 elo difference which according to the Fide rating system gives the lower grade a 5% chance to win. That means that if Carlsen played 100 games against a Fide Master he would win 95 and lose 5. This means that the odds would be even more heavily stacked against anyone on this site who has not got at least FM next to their name, NOLAUP might win 1 in a trillion^trillion. Obviously some 'top player' on Chess.com can beat Carlsen if they are running Rybka on four cores and leaving it to ponder for 10 hrs per day, duh?
A 
AMcHarg wrote:
SerbianChessStar wrote:
goldendog wrote:
You're thinking of Magnet Carlsen. Yeah he's terrible.
That he is playing like rybka with over 3100+ performance rating?
Actually it wasn't over 3100, it was just over 3000, so that definately means that NOLAUPT would be able to crush him.
Top 'players' on Chess.com are all cheats and are not even titled OTB (with few exceptions), i.e. not even 2300 (Fide Master). Considering that Carlsen is 2800 that's a 500 elo difference which according to the Fide rating system gives the lower grade a 5% chance to win. That means that if Carlsen played 100 games against a Fide Master he would win 95 and lose 5. This means that the odds would be even more heavily stacked against anyone on this site who has not got at least FM next to their name, NOLAUP might win 1 in a trillion^trillion. Obviously some 'top player' on Chess.com can beat Carlsen if they are running Rybka on four cores and leaving it to ponder for 10 hrs per day, duh?
A
i said over 3100 PFR when it was the 6th round or so.. i know its like 3006 after the tournament but during the tournament he had 3100ish
Also Magnus may not be winning in the Tal Memorial but hes sick.. and compare him to Nakamura.. Nakamura was sick and play sh*t while Carlsen sick and plays good still.
OTB he'd probably thrash all of us.
MAybe chess.com should hold a match magnus carlsen vs chess.com
If we drew against Julio
we definately would get kileld by Carlsen.
NOLAUPT's original question is just silly. I'm more curious about the sort of mental state that makes someone rated less than 1100 on this site think he could beat Magnus Carlsen.
Is this just some weird attempt to get attention, or is there really someone who could think those thoughts.
Enquiring minds want to know . . .
Nov 9, 2009
0
#71
Chris Moneymaker was a no-name internet player until he won the World Championship of Poker.
A man by the name of Sultan Khan beat no less than Capablanca in an off-hand game circa 1920's. Sultan Khan was not a titled or rated player, and had in fact learned to play modern chess just 2 days prior to playing Capa (the good sultan had been using the older islamic empire rules established prior to 1497). After the match, Sultan Khan remarked that chess was an interesting diversion, but too simplistic to be taken for a serious profession.
In conclusion, any player is beatable, even carlsen, even by an internet no-name....
Nov 9, 2009
0
#72
DJHeilke wrote:
Chris Moneymaker was a no-name internet player until he won the World Championship of Poker.
A man by the name of Sultan Khan beat no less than Capablanca in an off-hand game circa 1920's. Sultan Khan was not a titled or rated player, and had in fact learned to play modern chess just 2 days prior to playing Capa (the good sultan had been using the older islamic empire rules established prior to 1497). After the match, Sultan Khan remarked that chess was an interesting diversion, but too simplistic to be taken for a serious profession.
In conclusion, any player is beatable, even carlsen, even by an internet no-name....
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=2347
lol, because a top 10 player is a no-name? That's like saying its surprising that Ivanchuk beat Carlsen
Also comparing poker to chess is completely idiotic. They are completely different games, and it just shows that you have little to no understanding of both games if you think that they are comparable.
DJHeilke wrote:
A man by the name of Sultan Khan beat no less than Capablanca in an off-hand game circa 1920's.
Khan also lost to Vera Menchik, which Capablanca never did despite playing her many times.
Nov 9, 2009
0
#74
Alekhine got Menchik, too. This whole thread is silly lol. Rating numbers are useless when you are talking about players like Carlsen. If someone here reached 2900 (honestly) that would not in any capacity mean that they could take GM Carlsen. It means he could beat most players HERE, is all. :)
all the top players cheat tho
Nov 9, 2009
0
#76
skyhighx-x wrote:
all the top players cheat tho
Yes. It really is unfair of them to have such great genetics and have started playing much earlier than most of us. Its pretty much cheating.
SerbianChessStar wrote:
Also Magnus may not be winning in the Tal Memorial but hes sick.. and compare him to Nakamura.. Nakamura was sick and play sh*t while Carlsen sick and plays good still.
There's no comparison between Nakamura and Carlsen. Carlsen is definitely world champion caliber.
Don't compare their sicknesses though. Carlsen has a little throat thing going on and Nakamura was throwing up during his games.
If anyone from this site were to play Carlsen that would be an achievement.
Of course nobody on this site can beat him. He's 2800+ rated, and being trained by arguably the best chess player in history.
Unless Topalov, Anand or Kasparov himself play here, then no, nobody here can beat him.