How to remain calm when losing? Chess Anger Management?

I remember seeing that, Gengiskahnt.

Then again, many have said that there are two things you don't need to be good at to enjoy-sex and golf.

You're calling us nerds?

Devastating, we've never heard that one before.

Let me tell you a secret: Anger is a good thing!!!

The trick is to make sure you are using it. Don't let the anger use you.

Only once have I got angry with myself in a tournament game on chess.com,it was the decider and I missed a King Queen pin with a pawn,saw it as I clicked submit,ripped an item of clothing,waited 10 hours for the opponent to make his move,then moved the pawn as he hadnt seen it!A bad time turned into good times

I see....

hahaha someone is butthurt. sore loser much? go play checkers.  

this is all rather crazy. much of it doesn't seem to make any sense.

this thread is from 2013.

I think there are two types of how to lose a game: 1. Losing as a consequence of sound and in itself good moves. 2. Losing because of unsound moves and based on tricks.

So if you are soundly outplayed or even in a game with chances for both players, it should be no problem to accept a loss. But it is challenging to keep calm if you lose games of the second type, e.g. games in which the winner primarily focuses on annoying moves rather than on good ones (knight forks, cheap mating threads and so on in the hope that you may overlook one) or losing completely winning positions by the last desperate counterattack.

Why is it challenging to accept losses of the latter type? Because we tend to see chess as an objective game: There are good and bad moves and the win is granted to the player who plays the better moves. Nobody would study chess if he did not believe in this philosophy. And so far I think there is nothing wrong with it.

The important difference is: Some players deduce from this philosophy that the side who played better earns the right to win and thereby consider it unjust if victory is granted to the other side. Of course, they might then get upset or even agressive because they think about it in something like moral terms. And I must admit that I belong there, too.

I admire players who combine fighting spirit and a rather scientific approach: They see the game objectively, they do not mix together their moves and that strange notion of justice. They will not think that they will win a game nor that they have earned the win already. They will think about the position until the game is over. They stick truly to the objectivity of chess and maybe that even increases their strength.

So what will I do if I get upset in a type 2 game? I will tell myself that in chess there is no claim on victory and that I should better use my time thinking about the position than wasting it on my chess sentiment.

I get it, don't take the game seriously. That's gonna help a lot. But how exactly do I NOT take the game seriously?!

I'm still trying to figure that one out