What's the purpose of doing anything? Why would we not want to improve on something we have chosen to do? If I choose to play chess but also choose not to improve at the game...am I not wasting my time? The less you know about this game the more you will loose at it...that does not sound like fun to me.
Leaning more of anything is a positive...not a negative.
The problem is that, while you keep improving, so will the opposition you play.
I lose as much these days as I did 500 rating points ago.
That's why it is called "competition"...you want to improve...but so do everyone else...that is not a problem...and you lose more even though you have "improved your game" because you are playing stonger players now...that also is not a problem...why?...because I play to get better not to win...if my objective was only to win I would just use an engine...and really, who would I be fooling?
...you want to find out "the best you can be" in chess.
I feel sure that two 1200 rated players playing together derive just as much enjoyment out of the game as would two 2000+ rated players. I'm not suggesting that nobody bothers improving just that your enjoyment level will stay the same whatever level your at.
Your enjoyment level will in fact increase as you improve and win players above you...imagine your enjoyment level if you ever beat an IM for the first time...or even someone who has been defeating you all the time.
I think your mistaking enjoyment for satisfaction.
If I'm being honest I was getting my most pure enjoyment out of the game about 3-4 years ago. Everyone's different. Life's to complex to just state that the key to enjoying something most is working hard to get better at it.
If I didnt enjoy chess I wouldn't play. I can't imagine anyone continuing to play chess if they get no enjoyment from the game. I did enjoy chess more though when I was a class B and C player because I didnt feel the same pressure to win that I do now.
@yusuf_prasojo:
Why did you have to spam your point 3 times?
I guess it happened when I hit the "Reload" button while I was waiting for the screen to show up (when the connection is so poor), just after I submit a comment. Sometimes, if I didn't hit the button, the page won't show up even after an hour.
I have had many chessfriends whom I let to win against me, but I know for sure they are a lot weaker than me. If we discussed about something and they didn't listen, I would tell them to listen and told them that they can win only because I let them to win. If they don't believe it I will say "Now sit down and let's play 10 games and I will not let you win even once".
There are friends who keep telling others that they have beat this person and that and that. Against this type I usually don't like to loose. But I also found more enjoyment in playing adventurous games (not in losing!) so first I will win one game then "let" them win the next, like 2-1, 3-2, 4-3, so they cannot go everywhere telling people that they have beaten me LOL.
I find that kind of behaviour very weird, to say the least. That is, if any of it is true at all.
Which one? About the "Now sit down..." of course I didn't explain the complete situation. But I have taken the risk of doing so. For my difficulty in explaining in English, and for not having to describe something that may not be useful.
About "letting" my opponent to win, actually I didn't let them to win, I just take more risk. The weaker the opponent, the more risk I will take. It's just what we call "play the man" not "play the board". But sometimes I don't want to give my opponent a chance to brag and say how bad I play. There are situations where I need to maintain my reputation.
For example, when I need to be a coach, of course I don't want to hear somebody say "What?? You pay him to teach you? He cannot win even once against me!!"
There has been two persons asking me to be their coach. I didn't take the job because (I'm not a master and) I don't want to hear such words, which I often hear about chess coach.
Of course it is annoying. But when you realize that they have the right to have their fortune, of course you won't insult them. For me, I always respect others, especially when they don't take my rights. And when you have that kind of way to see things, you won't be annoyed by such behaviour.
This is to what I was referring. Pretend you are someone else and read it. It sounds pathetic and self important. First off, if you're going to let someone else "win", have the dignity to be quiet about letting them win. Regardless of how they boast. If you can't stomach that, then don't do any favors.
A king with no kingdom.
Yes, I understand your point. But of course you didn't get the whole picture.
Once I played in a tournament and I lost. He told me where I made mistakes. And I said "yes, I know". He told me that I should not do this and that because this this this and I nodded. I was not offended by the way he said what he said, something that may offend you I believe. I just said the truth "Yes, I'm aware of that". May be he was so curious as of why I did something that I knew was not proper and he asked "then why did you do that?". My answer was "I just want to have fun". And the chit chat went on... Later I told him that that was the way I play when I underestimate my opponents. I said "I thought you were a weak opponent. If I knew you are as good as this, I wouldn't make that move."
I don't think I offended him, but may be he felt as if his win was underestimated so he said "let's play once more!". And I beat him. Only one game (plus the chit chat) but enough to convince him.
Another time in a tournament I had a chance to chit chat before the game so I "knew" his level, and again my bad habit: "play the man". This time I won (because I knew his level before the game). In the post analysis he said as if couldn't accept the lost "Actually you made mistakes here here and here". And I said "Yes, I knew". No need to tell you what the process was, he then asked me to play. Three games, and he losted all then to my surprise he said "Alrite, now I realize we're in different class". I believe we'll become good friends the next time we meet again (I'm not that kind who makes enemies, but quite the opposite).
Yes, I understand your point. But of course you didn't get the whole picture.
Once I played in a tournament and I lost. He told me where I made mistakes. And I said "yes, I know". He told me that I should not do this and that because this this this and I nodded. I was not offended by the way he said what he said, something that may offend you I believe. I just said the truth "Yes, I'm aware of that". May be he was so curious as of why I did something that I knew was not proper and he asked "then why did you do that?". My answer was "I just want to have fun". And the chit chat went on... Later I told him that that was the way I play when I underestimate my opponents. I said "I thought you were a weak opponent. If I knew you are as good as this, I wouldn't make that move."
I don't think I offended him, but may be he felt as if his win was underestimated so he said "let's play once more!". And I beat him. Only one game (plus the chit chat) but enough to convince him.
Another time in a tournament I had a chance to chit chat before the game so I "knew" his level, and again my bad habit: "play the man". This time I won (because I knew his level before the game). In the post analysis he said as if couldn't accept the lost "Actually you made mistakes here here and here". And I said "Yes, I knew". No need to tell you what the process was, he then asked me to play. Three games, and he losted all then to my surprise he said "Alrite, now I realize we're in different class". I believe we'll become good friends the next time we meet again (I'm not that kind who makes enemies, but quite the opposite).
I'm going to be kind and say that this is extremely odd indeed.
Yusuf. You've been incredibly polite in explaining all of this and responding to all comments. I suppose it might be cultural or maybe what you find as charming is not really what many of us find charming. Sometimes chess players criticize or advise because they just can't help themselves. Thanks for sharing.
A recent opponent has made the suggestion that perhaps I shouldn't try to improve my game if I want to keep the fun in chess. I don't believe this to be true. Any improvement I've made in my game only seems to enhance the fun and enjoyment I get out of chess rather than making me feel utter disappointment.
Does anyone else feel that a higher rating/improving your game/learning takes away from the enjoyment or do these factors only reinforce your love of the game?
Perhaps your opponent should take up checkers where the real excitement comes after setting the board up correctly, rather than from stimulating the mind with all those new fangled plans and concepts. 
Maybe your opponent doesn't want you to improve because that would make the game more enjoyable for her/him.
Yusuf. You've been incredibly polite in explaining all of this and responding to all comments. I suppose it might be cultural or maybe what you find as charming is not really what many of us find charming. Sometimes chess players criticize or advise because they just can't help themselves. Thanks for sharing.
I read in a thread someone says that you can be deep sometimes. I didn't pay attention to your posts so I guessed they admire you because you're pretty but I was wrong.
Just almost as Marvellosity said, I'm an "odd" person. Not a cultural issue I guess, because I'm an "odd" person in almost any surroundings.
I find that there are a lot of different things to spend my time on as part of my chess hobby. I can play correspondence ("turn based") games, blitz games, slow "real time" games, or I can do tactics puzzles, read endgame books, read middle game books, read opening books, play through master games, watch masters play on the internet, watch my friends play, look up specific topics on the internet as they come to me, etc.
Frequently, the things that I choose to do, because they appeal to me as the most fun at that particular moment, are NOT the things that I know will help me the most in becoming a stronger player.
I know that to improve, I need to play more "real time" games (some slow, but especially blitz). I know that I need to spend more time on tactics puzzles. But I've spent quite a bit of time reading opening books, even though I know that knowledge will only help in a small percentage of my games where we get into those opening lines.
So I could probably be a stronger player now, if I dedicated myself to those activities that will improve my game the most. But many times, I choose to spend my time on the parts of chess that seem fun at the moment, instead of those that will improve my game. And other times, I decide that I really want to get better, so I focus on an area that isn't as much fun for me, which I know I need to do in order to improve.
So I do agree that improving and having fun don't always go hand in hand. Sometimes, you have to choose between the two. But if you're never having fun, then you need a different hobby.
Fromper you're right but all of us improving see the game in a more complex and enterteining level. It's a bit odd continuing to move the picies around as a total beginner and not learning anthink , and I think chess is more fun and entertaining at least when you know the basis but with those too it can be annoying so I think the more you go up, the more you improve the more it's intersting and hard.
@yusuf_prasojo:
Why did you have to spam your point 3 times?