Age

"I hate it when people just assume that because you are 11 like I am that it will be an easy win. Why do people actually think that age makes that big a difference?"

The "people" you are refering to... are they adults or teenagers?

Teenagers were 11 years old just a few short years ago and they KNOW that they have improved since then. They are assuming that you played as bad as they did when THEY were eleven.

Let them think what they will...it doesn't matter in chess, you can prove them wrong by beating them!!! The more that a person believes that an 11 year old chessplayer is going to play bad, the more their ego will be crushed when you beat them.

Try not to "hate it" but use it to win, Those "people" will be more nervious about losing to you than you are of losing to them...And...  if they are better than you, they may accept a draw more readily than risk the embrassment of losing. 

As anyone gets older and more experianced in chess, they learn to RESPECT their opponent regardless of their age.

I played Raymond Keene just after he'd become British champion when I was 11/12 in a simul after a tourney and the schoolteachers who had organised it came and murmered in my ear that I should resign - I was winning !!! so I refused  Keene was spending ages longer at my board than any of the others, including his protege Julian Hodgson's  It was a very complex position which was obviously beyond the understanding of the 'adults' apart from Keene himself.

Eventually we drew, but I still believe to this day that I wudda won iffen only the bloody 'adults' had left me alone an' not constantly distracted me - I was spending my thinking time explaining the finer points of the position and the various combinations to these bloody patzers

My point being, that no one should ever underestimate anyone - I sure as sugar didn't when I played Luke McShane when he was only about 8, an' just as well, I only just scraped the win - an btw he was perfectly grown-up about it - don't think I ever met a child with such maturity

Learn from my mistakes: Never play chess with/against your aunt!!!!

She was always bragging how good she plays chess and then one day I played against her and there were our entire family (my grandparents, uncels etc.).....The second I said check-mate.....I knew I did something wrong! No one said anything but.... oh god....we all laughed, she laughed, they laughed, I laughed.....but inside I was scared...

now look, my brain works fast, in online chess I spend about ten seconds a move and have 100s of games in progress at a time. I like to play fast games in live chess. Though my age is not being told, my rating is hovering around 1200 in online and 1000 in live. I believe this to be correlating to the average rating of my opponents. In online chess my average win is 950, my average draw is 1044, and my average loss is 938. In online chess however, my average win is about 1050, and my average draw is 1200 and my average loss is like 1400 (I play in a lot of tournaments). Finally I would like to say that your rating in my opinion is very dependent on your opponents, as I explained before.

I hit forty, had the black candles on the birthday cake and all, and was a struggling C player. Now in clear sight of 50, I'm a solid A player.

I'm not saying that my experience refutes the assertion that dementia begins its slow colonization of all thought processes in the late-30s, only that with hard work, dedication, and perhaps the right medications, evidence of mental deterioration can be postponed. Just because your opponent is old and gray and in poor health, doesn't mean you're gonna crush the old patzer.

hi !! this is for the players thinks themselves old enough.

1. Donot play with equal or higher rated players.

2. Start "enjoying" Chess.

3.Start Sharing your experience in the Forum in Chess.com

4.and donot beleive the 'date of birth' given in a players profile. I know a player born in the year 1905 !!!

Thirukkalathy.K.

This comment contains a good point that may help you see it from an adults point of view.

You want to be treated as an equal over a chess board, which isn't wrong, and like RobertTG said experienced players will, but even in your mind age matters, because you see it as something to be proud of to beat a 19 year old.  In that way you don't have anything to lose, if they beat you you may not like it, but on some level it's ok because "you're just a kid", but when you win it's exciting to you and proof that you should be respected

If this mindset effects you who are calling for no age-ist behavior certainly it's no surprise it exists in the minds of others too... and not as something rude,  you're not trying to be rude when you're excited to beat an adult just like they're not trying to be rude not wanting to lose to someone who's "just a kid"

It's not just age. We always label people by their looks. When we see someone, we are already judging them. By their look, age, sex, voice, etc.

i'm 36.  it really bothers me when people treat me like i'm 38.

I agree with Murrrrr. The real explanation is that stereotyping is as basic a human characteristic as any. Of course, it is wrong to stereotype because they are not always true, but people do it anyway without realizing it and without intending any malice. You're right though, I probably would assume I could beat someone just based on that they are younger than say fourteen. Likewise, if I see a 55 year old gentleman playing chess in the park, I'm probably going to assume he could beat me (I'm 18), even though in reality it might be his first time playing. Also, a lot of confidence (or lack thereof) is something I mistankenly judge on whether or not I could beat someone.

lol tonydal

True, but it's not about how good they will be, it's how tough of a player they will be at the moment you play them.

I think whenever you sit down to play a game, you should take your opponent seriously. No matter if he is 11 or if he is 55 or even if he is 95. May the best man win in chess(I say "he" and "man" not to be sexist, Im just trying simplify my response). If you loose to an 11 year old and you are twice or three times his age, then he must be a sharp player and he beat you fair and square. Its good to be humbled in all things in life from time to time - especially chess.

This bias comes down to a matter of experience. Youth has less experience. And like most stereotypes, this one has some basis on fact. I won't deny that because I'm 17 some older people will be better

I'm 16, so when I play against someone around 40-50-60 even, I always have the moments worth of intimidation, before I realize I will most likely beat them. There is one play in particular, Rated 1750 and around the age of 50, whom I have a positive record against. The first time we played, we were in a Books-a-Million. It was a 25 minute per player, no increment. He looked fairly smug as we began... and 19 moves later, faced with mate in 3, he looked thunderous. He even refused to analyze the game with me afterward =). Sure I lose the second game a month later... but I won the third one =).

That's one example against one player. Hardly a legitimate sample size for a statistical analysis. I think we need to come up with a NEW term . Let's call it "chess age". This is the number of years spent seriously pursuing chess. By the logic of chess age, those with a higher chess age will likely defeat those with a lower chess age. Older people will have more time to aquire chess age. Thus, older people will likely defeat younger people.