exchanging queens

Have been playing 2 guys that are rated two and three hundred points above me.They have forced me to exchange queens within the first 5 moves and they are under no threat.I think this spoils the game somewhat.Its not as if im a strong player and their frightened of me.Is this a popular thing to do?

Not particularly. It depends on the player. I have been guilty of this myslef at times; it stems not from fear of loss but a confidence of superior endgame technique. But it shouldn't put you off, trade queens if it is your best option and avoid a trade if it isin't. That's it- Good luck! 

Any pieces trades without a point  is the strongest indicator that somebody doesn't have a clue what they're doing. I've seen beginners get all possessive about their queens because they feel they can't attack without them. This seems to be the other extreme.

The states of a chess game BEFORE and AFTER the Queens are traded are extremely unique and any one who rushes into it for lack of a clear purpose (let alone some psychological one) is showing a weak understanding of chess.

In your case, I'd say be glad ... you're playing chess players who are letting you know they don't understand the value of trading ... use that to your advantage for the rest of the game :)

Or maybe it's one of the plentiful mainline openings or systems where queens are exchanged early.

Or maybe knights and bishops have been set up in such a way that your opponent wants your king on a side of the board (assuming you took the queen with the king.)  As well as that you lose any castling rights you may have (if you move the king.) 

That , to me, was the downside in the Queen trade, losing the right to castle. 

I've looked at the games involved.  Regardless of why your opponent wanted queens exchanged your opponents in both games certainly made best use of it. 

Well in that case I can say I have sometimes forced such an exchange myself. 

Can they play without a queen?  Some people can't. 

Can they castle?  No. 

Are development of my knights and bishops such that I think I can make best use of the exchange? 

Those are things to consider.  Considering your in an active game against your opponent I'd imagine hes delighted to see you posting on this forum about it!  I know I would be! 

And no it doesn't spoil the game for me, its part of it! 

Well, in some KID lines the White can force en early exchange of Queens, but it's not very good for him.

if you mean JMC its what i would have done.to prevent castling, its a basic tactic.

Can't a guy make baseless statements without being asked to back them up all the time? Jeez.

I guess the Ruy exchange is one.

I lost rather horribly OTB as White this season when the queens were exchanged very early in a Pirc/Philidor type setup after dxe5 dxe5.

Trading queens to prevent castling isn't the best strategic decision. Preventing castling is generally effective because you get an attack against the centralized king. But you've just traded your best attacking piece.

Here is an example:

The Exchange King's Indian:

This isn't played anymore because it's just not very promising for white. Despite the fact the position looks good on the surface.

Nicely put! :)

Yes, if the other player initiates very early and you have to use your King to recapture, you're generally the overall loser in the exchange even though the material loss was equal.  And that's probably why they did it.

Stopping your opponent from castling is,nt new . I believe Morphy regarded it as valuable as gaining a miner piece.

Nevertheless, some positions (not the one posted by Loomis though, as black even has some positional advantages of his own there, such as the pawn on e5, and if white challenges it d4 is very weak) the misplaced king simply has nuisance value, as the king can still get in the way of other pieces and maybe allow a check on the d file with tempo. A lot of times it can be coped with though.

Yes, a lot of times when black allows this queen trade (like loomis points out) he just plays c6, Kc7, and he's already equal.  You shouldn't always jump at the queen trade just because of castling, with the queens of it doesn't matter nearly as much --  and as long as it's a queen for a queen it really shouldn't bother you, it all has to do with the position like shivsky's post points out.

In my experience, as my observation that most people are quite cowardly, the same holds true in chess. When I am pressuring under a few moves with queen, immediately, a move is made to exchange the queens. This grinds game to a halt where all the other pieces face off in a game of attrition and then eventually the other person  scrambles to queen a pawn. This is akin to forcing two people in a duel to give up their guns and then scrambling  for a gun.