OTB - Taking it easy on lower rated players?

I learned never to take it easy on someone in otb chess. you should always respect your opponent, if you give too many changes suddenly he will be checkmating you.  in otb there is limited amount of people chess so otb nearly no one of them is real bad everybody can almost beat everybody on a good day. 

once I relaxed too much in a "easy" game because I thought I had everything under control. suddenly because I had my eyes focused on an advanced attack and I assumed nothing dangerous could happen he suddenly checkmated me, I did not worry about defence.

at the time I played otb I was rated around 1400-1600 and could beat players up to 1800 on a good day. some of them underestimated me.

If you're playing  people who are learning its a good thing to give them a handicap to even out the game.   Use a clock and give yourself a tenth of the time the student gets or swap colours if you get too far ahead so any material you gain becomes a hill to climb.  Kids (however you define them) will love this.  I find these handicaps better learning tools then thrashing somebody who doesn't know what they're doing and then telling them where they went wrong.  

Oops, my mistake.  Re-reading it I see I misinterpreted it.

For me personally, playing against a higher rated player I would never want him to take it easy. Playing against a good player will teach you that you have much to learn and will motivate me to try harder.

What I do with other players on the school chess team who play worse than me is I say why it is a bad move, ask them what the thought behind it is, and then exploit it, telling them that such-and-such a move was better.

Hehe.  A few weeks ago I was talking to both my grandmothers, both who are over 80 years old, about the perception of age.  They said you never stop feeling 20-something or 30-something, and at the same time their 60 year old kids are still "kids" to them.  Heh.

So a kid to me isn't a kid to everyone.  In my post I was thinking of school aged people, K-12, so approx ages 5 to 18.

This has been my experience with newer players (no matter the age).  You offer time or piece odds and they're insulted.  They want a real game.  That way when they do well it's real progress, and if they beat you they know they deserved it.

So if I graduated, I'm an adult?

Depends on who you ask (or rather, how old they are).  There's no social consensus.  If you mean how long you apply for USCF reduced rates, then I guess however long you're in school (college too I think?).

If you mean me personally, no, I'd still think of you as a kid

Some people are adult at 15, others will remain children their whole life... Age is not the real matter here.

Pretty much what I was about to say.  This comes down to one's concept of adulthood, though.  What seems immature to some might seem justified by others.

I just last week started giving beginning chess lessons to a gifted 8 year old.  It's Spooky how quickly he's picking it up.  Three lessons and he's seeing moves I'm not catching. (hmmm ... ya think that might say more about me than him?).  

So far, no problem with his feeling insulted by my "taking it easy on him," since I do it transparently ("Are you sure you want to make that move?") and I'm genuine in praising his successes.  Also, we're really having Fun! 

How did you come to meet a gifted kid to give lessons to?

Next door neighbor's son -- known him for 7 of his 8 years, so that helps.  Also I've worked with kids in my psych practice, so I'm pretty good at following a kid's shifting moods -- when the concentrating starts being tiring, they want to get silly and change the rules for awhile -- the thing to do is play along, enjoy the silliness, and when they're ready to learn some more they'll let you know.

Hmmmmmmmmm.  :)

I agree. The worse thing you can do is let weaker players win or go easy with them. They will just develop a false sense of being better than they are.

Help them, but don't "be kind".  Chess is suppose to make one think!

At the risk of being drawn into a debate, I must disagree.  Chess isn't "supposed to" do anything.  It's a game.  A circuscribed activity carried out by people who enter into the activity after having mutually agreed upon a specific set of rules.  It has no universal "goal."

Personally, I remeber knowing how to think Way before I started playing chess.  And in my daily life, I notice myself "thinking" Virtually All the Time -- in truth, I often can't seem to Stop!  

In fact, I play chess in large part to Stop thinking for awhile.  Chess is really Relaxing for me ... so please, I beg you, don't tell me "chess" is "upset" with me because I'm not doing what "chess" thinks I'm "supposed to" do?  Please?  That would ruin Everything! -- !

I have to admit that I often play chess so as not have to think about what is happening in this crazy world. I was thinking along the line of teaching someone to play chess and not for the sheer fun of it. The subject was to be easy on weaker players and not how to have fun at chess.  A skittles game is just for the fun of it. A time to be wilg and attempt those wild moves one would not attempt in a serious game. I'm getting off of the subjest. 

And you are correct, in that, chess isn't a "universal goal".  We set the goal. I play chess for the sheer fun of it, but I try to win. No doubt not as seriously as I should at times. Sometimes I just enjoy being wild and crazy, and I usually lose those games.

Oh, Now I understand you, Cp -- you Pretend to be a Serious Chess Player, but you're really just "a Wild and Crazy Guy!" (tsk, tsk, tsk..)

Wait, that's encouraging -- now I can challenge you and be pretty sure I'll win!