I mean obviously it would mean more if it was a classical game, but this still seems quite incredible no matter how you look at it.
+1000 point upset in Corsica!
Sort:
That is so bizarre! Definitely not some "preparation win," either.
Najdorfian wrote:
How did a 1500+ rated player even manage to play this well?
Home prep? Even so, a 2600+ player shouldn't be losing in 28 moves to a 1500+ rated player.
This smells fishy, especially since this was a blitz game.
You may be right. I searched for online results and found the site for the Corsican Chess League. They reported that Anthony Morel lost to GM Edouard Romain on October 12, 2014 in the Oscaro Open.
It was a big tournament with lots of press coverage. Vichy Anand and Hou Yifan played. You would think that the press would mention some 1000 point upsets.
http://corse-echecs.blogspot.fr/2014_10_01_archive.html
http://www.corsenetinfos.fr/De-Bastia-a-Ajaccio-la-Corse-capitale-mondiale-des-echecs_a11813.html
Jul 12, 2015
0
#26
Najdorfian wrote:
Jion_Wansu wrote:
It was blitz. People blunder in blitz
You're joking right? If anything, blitz should give the vastly higher rated player the advantage. It's the reason why GM's don't play blitz against Stockfish or Houdini.
Not joking at all. In blitz there is less time to think. Less time to think, more mistakes that are made. More mistakes that are made, more randomized the result becomes.
In blitz there is way more randomness possible. Sure that might mean there will be more quick wins for the higher player, but also a higher chance of some uncharacteristic blunder cropping up. Trust me, if I was playing a weaker player and wanted to win I would not want to play blitz and take the chance that because I wasn't fully focused for 5 minutes straight I miss some random idea that's easy to exploit. I wouldn't want to put myself in a situation where I actually can't figure out all the details of my opponent's (otherwise pathetic) swindle attempts.
Well funnily enough Hikaru has beaten computers in the past in ICC blitz (think it was fritz but not sure what version it was). But in any case, part of what you see with computers is not just because they are stronger, but also because their way of playing is fundamentally different.
Jul 12, 2015
0
#28
Agreed, the faster the time control the more random any single game will be. However, if a person plays 100 blitz games against the same person, their final score should be very similar to the expected score in slower time controls. The difference will be that there will be fewer draws and more "accidents".
When you get to a +1000 point difference, the expected loss rate makes this game truly newsworthy.
Jul 13, 2015
0
#30
Class is class. The top 100 in standard are pretty much the same as the top 100 in blitz. The order is a bit different, but class is class.
Interestingly, it appears this event was not FIDE rated for some reason.
In Blitz it is much easier to miss a variation and blunder...
Jul 13, 2015
0
#32
Elubas wrote:
Well, at least we know a 1500 player can beat a 2700 player. One cannot imagine how these things happen, but they do. Rapid is certainly not classical, but this is still pretty crazy.
2659
2700s are the top fifty in the world.
Jul 13, 2015
0
#33
Najdorfian wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
Elubas wrote:
Well, at least we know a 1500 player can beat a 2700 player. One cannot imagine how these things happen, but they do. Rapid is certainly not classical, but this is still pretty crazy.
2659
2700s are the top fifty in the world.
It's all relative. One year they are 2700+, the next back to 2600+.
Jobava is a good example. He went from 2700+ to 2600+ in a single tournament.
Edouard's peak is 2688. He's never been a 2700 player.
My USCF peak is 1982. Do you want to call me an expert? No one else will.
A player can have a 1500 rating for many reasons. It may not necessarily reflect their true strength. Some people go long periods without competing officially, improving at chess on the side all the while. If he entered an open section of a tournament he likely felt that he was much stronger than his rating. Even moreso if it's rapid.
It looks like the GM made a mistake at a really unfortunate time and stumbled into a line where Black had no tactical counterplay that could allow him to use his greater knowledge and experience, and the White player had sufficient attacking skill to convert that line.
Basically the 2600 player just played the game like me. He moved his pieces without giving much thought and underestimated his opponent...