Play the board, not the rating.
Does your opponent's rating make you play differently?

Opponent's rating certainly has an impact on how you play.
I think it is possible to assume that players with a higher rating will not make mistakes. It is reassuring that even quite good players make some real howlers (just like me) and especially at blitz.

i can definitely tell you that GMs play differently based on their opponents rating
I'm sure that's true. But I bet Nakamura wishes he didn't play so badly against Carlsen. I think there's a lot of psychology involved in chess, and my point is that there's a danger in letting yourself believe that you won't beat your opponent because his rating is much higher than yours.
My solution is not to look at my opponent's rating, but there are probably better solutions. Nakamura for example does not have that luxury against Carlsen.

http://www.chess.com/blog/TVEDAS/a-personal-journey-through-the-psychology-of-chess
This is a pretty good read. Talking about being over confident against lower rated opposition.

Whenever I go to tournaments I try to make sure my opponent knows my rating because I agree and think it will only make them play worse. If they're higher than me they may not take my threats seriously. If they're lower than me they may get timid and intimidated. Either way I want them to know my rating.

http://www.chess.com/blog/TVEDAS/a-personal-journey-through-the-psychology-of-chess
This is a pretty good read. Talking about being over confident against lower rated opposition.
Great testimony. I realize that "play the board..." is good advice but I know that I, personally, have to toughen up psychologically to let that happen. The personal journey quoted above is the wake up I needed.
Thanks chester6.

Yes, when playing someone ranking much lower than me - I play very aggressively, making experimental moves - taking chances....thinking there is the likelihood that I'll win anyways - no matter what.
Yes, when playing someone ranking much higher than me - I play very aggressively, making experimental moves - taking chances....thinking there is the likelihood that I'll lose anyways - no matter what.
It doesn't always work out that way, of course.
But it's always fun and I learn something from it.

For many players, it does. Should it? No. Just play your game, no point trying to adjust based solely on the player.

http://www.chess.com/blog/TVEDAS/a-personal-journey-through-the-psychology-of-chess
This is a pretty good read. Talking about being over confident against lower rated opposition.
That was interesting, thanks. I would like to 'play the board' and all that, but it seems hard to me, and to some others here too it seems.
Conversely, I sometimes find people play badly against me, or resign before they really need to, if I have a much higher rating than them. I think the whole issue of psychology in chess, as opposed to actual proficiency is very interesting. I think I could perform quite a lot better quite quickly if I could iron out some of these weaknesses. I am reading The Seven Deadly Chess Sins by Rowson at the moment, in the hopes it might have some useful advice. Seems a bit verbose at the moment though. Lots of words but I couldn't tell you how they have helped.

Yes. If I feel I'll have better winning chances against a better player I'll go with a Sicilian, otherwise I'll go for 1...e5 and head for a Petroff or Berlin Wall taking age into account as well. If there's a good chance they'll make continuous minor slips in an equal position where it's easy to formulate a plan then why not use the more practical option? The Sicilian's complexity would be unnecessary against opponents within a certain range (under 2000 USCF?) but is still good for practice games.
Kids typically hate queenless middlegames so will usually overpress (though white should be aggressive like Kasparov's win with a pawn sacrifice against Kramnik in one of their post-WC games)
My repertoire against 1.Nf3 1.c4 and 1.d4 is consistent however, Nimzo-Indian, Queen's Indian, or Hedgehog, or even a classical formation (e6+d5+c5) against certain lines.

Opponent's rating certainly has an impact on how you play.
I think it is possible to assume that players with a higher rating will not make mistakes. It is reassuring that even quite good players make some real howlers (just like me) and especially at blitz.
Yes.
I found some time ago that I played worse against better opponents. Since then I have avoided looking at the rating of my opponent, and was recently surprised to beat someone with a much higher rating than I had before. Anyone else find the same?