Can you win a game with a significantly less accuracy then your opponent?

I won a game with 20 less accuracy than my opponent, is that my rough accuracy in that match or is it just that the chess engine can't see unlimited moves. Plz no jokes about timout or resignation 

Accuracy tool isn't really an appropriate or an effective tool to evaluate your performance in a game.

Yes it's your comparative accuracy with your Opponent and engine calculated accuracy with all moves of game....

Yes it is. But it's not mandatory for a person with a higher accuracy to always go away with the victory. One could be making perfect moves monotonously meanwhile his opponent make average good moves. And then suddenly you hang your Queen, and the game is lost. 

Yeah u are right 

I've won with  39 point lower rating - my opponent was beating me, I desperately set up a simple mate possibility I was hoping he wouldn't see - he didn't. 

Computer accuracy is overblown as a metric.  Playing strength has a lot more to do with tactic complexity and subtlety of position.  The computer gauges accuracy based upon an unrealistic ideal, treating a simpler-but-slower win as inaccurate.

A good example, Lasker v. Capablanca.  The computers would argue Capablanca was an immensely stronger player, but concurrent tournament results favor Lasker.  Capablanca won the head-to-head match, but his winning percentage against the field was a lot less (fewer losses, but much fewer wins).  In reality, there wasn't a big difference between the two, as they'd both crush any mere mortal.  Capablanca avoided complications, so playing accurately was easier within his style.  Lasker invited complications, building them up until his opponent's position collapsed.

Another example, Lionel Kierseritzky's computer accuracy is greater than Adolf Anderssen's, but the game results show that Anderssen was a much stronger player.  Being "more accurate" doesn't count for anything if you can't see the tactics that arise from the position.

To put it simply, don't worry about computer accuracy.  The computer analysis is a good tool for finding missed tactics, but it's questionable whether you should take it any further than that.

Maybe. How would a single blunder resulting in a loss in an otherwise nearly flawless game be rated, and how would that affect the overall accuracy of the game?

Wow thread still active

Jk

It's possible

Yes, happens to me all the time. Someone just has to make a real bozo blunder and the other person has to catch it. Usually the other person so caught up with caputuring all my pieces and probably checking the engine so that their accuracy is at over 85%, and then they fail to pay attention to what's going on and I checkmate em with something corny.

Yes have an almost perfect game from the accuracy point of view and then step into forced 1-move mate.

I didnt know that about him, but thats really cool. I used to play his opening a lot when I first started chess about a year ago and didnt know what I was doing lol