I think it's better to find them equally matched opponents rather than let them win. Don't worry, if a kid picks up an interest in chess, they'll be creaming you sooner than you know it.
playing chess with little kids
Sort:
Hello wilfhog, welcome to chess.com.
While I have no personal experience with teaching chess to children, my speculation is that it's somewhat case by case wherein you take two main factors into account - current level of chess competance and the child's confidence.
If the level of competance is low - I'd "play" with them by making puzzles on the board with them, like "See how many hops you can do with the horse to come over and gobble that piece" or chasing/tag games where you let them have a Queen and they have to figure out how to capture your knight sortof scenerios... nothing will frustrate a beginner by feeling overwhelmed with the array of choices and having to remind themselves how each piece moves everytime. So yeah, I'd take time familiarizing them with the movement of different pieces in small contrived "skirmishes", especially the knight.
I think it is safe to treat them somewhat as adults, I mean, you don't have to play ruthlessly of course, but it depends on how the individual tends to respond to adversity - some kids will get spurred on by it, other's will decide they hate the game.
Perhaps you could give us a slightly better idea of where your grandkids are at? Do they play against each other? Recognise basic mates? Know what a fork is? Etc.
Also, here are some links to other threads of a similar nature you might find helpful, in many of these posts parents weigh in on the issue and could likely provide you with more insight...
A thread by Whistleblower called "Introducing Chess to Kids"
A Blog Called "Chess for Children" by EyeoftheTiger
A thread by Etienne called "Playing against a beginner"
(in this one he actually asks a question very similar to yours about whether it is okay to "beat" them all the time kindof thing)
Oh, and maybe print out a copy of PerfectGent's blog for your grandkids... I think he summarizes some beginner ideas here.
Play them with a sufficient handicap (for example without your Queen and Rooks etc.).
My opinion as I'm only 13, is that if you play with them, play at your full strength. If you let them win you they will feel as they are better than you and they will think that they're good enough to not try any more. I've seen it happening to a lot of kids in my club.
believe me im 12 and even at your hardest youll still lose
lol
When I was young I used to play with my grandfather all the time. He NEVER let me win. I NEVER beat him. But I never stopped trying. Likewise, I play with my daughter now, and she knows that when she finally beats me, it will be for real, not because I LET her win. It doesn't count if you throw the game, and kids know that. They want it to be for real.
I agree that every child is different, but here is what I did with my daughter: I kept opening up with the Scholar's mate over and over until she learned how to defend against it. After a couple times of getting checkmated really quickly she started to learn what I was going to do next and started anticipating my next move. I think this is crucial in learning the game. Even tho she wasn't winning yet, she was building confidence when she was able to stop me from winning as quickly. "Am I doing good, Daddy?"
However, the frustration of never winning can take its toll on anyone, and at some point they will begin to lose interest. So I told her that I was going to give her the OPPORTUNITY to checkmate me. I told her that I was going to use the "sandbag" openings ("Sandbagging" is a racing term for not performing at your best - like a car that's filled with sandbags to make it heavier and thus give the opponent a better chance at winning). I told her that she would have a 2 move head start before I tried to figure out how to get myself out of trouble.
I flipped a coin twice before each game. If it was heads-heads, I would open 1.g4 (g5 as black), 2.f4 (f5 as black). If it was heads-tails, I would open 1.g4, 2.f3. Tails-Heads = 1.f4, 2.g4; Tails-Tails = 1.f3, 2.g4. These are obviously the worst opening moves you can make as it opens you up to Fool's Mate, but it took her a number of times before she saw it. She also picked up on the fact that I would say, "good" every time she opened with 1...e5 and "ok, let's see how this plays out" whenever she'd open with something different, or if her 2nd move wasn't 2...Qh4#. She would usually get tempted by the f4 pawn and move 2...exf4. This taught her the value of focusing on the mate, rather than grabbing material just because it was available.
When she finally saw the Fool's Mate and moved 2...Qh4#, instead of saying, "Ok, let's see how this plays out," I said, "VERY good!! That's mate!" I did it a couple more times just so that she could recognize it when she saw it, and now we're back to playing for real.
Sometimes when she gets stuck, and she asks, I show her ALL of her options. I take each piece on the board and show her every place that it could move to. "This would be stupid, cuz you're just giving it away... You could take this piece, and then I could take your piece which would be a good trade for me... If you moved here, I could take you but then you would take my piece, and I'm not about to trade a rook for a pawn, so technically it's a safe square at the moment... None of my pieces can reach you there, but it doesn't really help you to move there either... If you moved here you'd be threatening this piece of mine which would force me to decide if I want to move it, defend it, or sacrifice it... etc."
I think the most important difference when teaching a child rather than playing an actual opponent is allowing them the chance to take back a really stupid move. If they give their queen away for free, show them how and let them make a different move instead.
I hope this helps. Good luck.
Billium248 wrote
"When I was young I used to play with my grandfather all the time. He NEVER let me win. I NEVER beat him. But I never stopped trying. Likewise, I play with my daughter now, and she knows that when she finally beats me, it will be for real, not because I LET her win. It doesn't count if you throw the game, and kids know that. They want it to be for real."
TOTALLY AGREE
Never let them win, make them come back for more, when they finally win one then thay will know it was on their own and will feel great about it.
My dad doesn't really play chess, but we used to mini-golf all the time when I was young, and he would always beat me. He never just gave me the win. And no matter how frustrating it was to lose to him time after time, it only fueled my passion to beat him. It just wouldn't have meant anything to me if he just gave me the win.
I assume the same thing applies to chess. I want real wins, cause fake wins would just be a waste of time.
I wouldnt let them win but if i lost i would be tempted to shrug it off and tell everyone i let him/her win. hehee
I'd appreciate anyone's opinion. Should one ever deliberately let little kids, say under 10, win from time to time? At what age should one 'force' kids to play for keeps like adults (e.g., above 12?)? If there is no general rule of thumb, why not? Thanks.