Six. Also the age at which my kids started learning. Great for developing analytical thinking at a young age.
I’m a full-time chess teacher.
I taught myself the game when I was 6 from a book. (Chess for Children by Bott + Morrison.)
I agree with the above post.
At present I work mainly with 10-18 year olds. The most experienced + gifted can play 4 hour games against adults.
There are undoubtedly educational benefits, provided the child is enjoying learning the game. See the article here:
On some advice from another poster in an earlier thread (DDG?) I got my kids the first Chesster and Fritz chess program. It’s a good mix of silliness and instruction, with a sort of theme and objectives. They’re both able to go through and handle all of the concepts presented, to varying degrees of success. If you’re like me and really don’t know what you’re doing then it’s a good way to instruct them. Of course I’m sure some of the books mentioned here won’t hurt, either.
For his master’s thesis, my husband wrote about this. Kids who learn chess also seem to have an easier time mastering concepts in math and music, for instance. It also helps them to learn to focus and concentrate, which enhances study skills.
I learnt when I was about 5, then started playing at school from ages 7-11. At some point during this time I played Dad after a gap of a couple of years, and I was tremendously, irrationally upset when I realised I could beat him easily and he wasn’t the master I remembered from before! I don’t think we played again after I burst into tears when he put his rook en prise on the second move!
Luckily, that didn’t affect my subsequent “career”, and I’ve played on and off since, reaching a reasonable club level (FIDE roughly 1600, if anyone’s interested). I think the most important thing is for the kid to enjoy the game and want to play it - if you try to force them, it’s likely to end unhappily. But I’m sure you knew that. I’ve tried to interest my younger brother in the game, but he’d rather do other things - fair enough.
Interesting point somebody made about removing pawns from the board to teach the moves. I’ve only heard of the opposite method, i.e. start with just kings and pawns, then add each piece one at a time so you play with kings, knights and pawns, then kings, bishops and pawns (removing the knights), and so on - this is supposed to work quite well. But yes, books and computers are definitely the way to go if the kid is serious about playing and improving. Good luck!
I learned when I was in the 5th grade (from a kid who was younger than me–how insulting!), but I taught my little sister when she was 5. She in no way understood the complexity of strategy at that age, but she did learn the pieces and the way they moved.
My son was 3½ when he asked if I would teach him chess. He picked up the movements very quickly and now, at age 6 is really starting to understand strategy. He’s able to think several moves ahead. I was probably 15 when I learned to play. Suburban Plankton thinks he was 7-8 when he started.
None of us are really good chess players, but we all enjoy it.
Hey, I was just going to start this thread!
My son is two years old which is obviously too young, but I’ve been thinking a lot lately about various things he could get into and the appropriate ages for each activity. I’m thinking maybe 5 or 6 would be the very earliest for chess, depending on the child, of course. Now I just need to start threads for all the other stuff he might could get into. 
Mom was teaching me the game by second grade. Granted, I never won, but it was a learning experience, nonetheless. Never too early to teach a youngster.
[hijack]Oh, if you can, have him learn another language! They pick it up so quick when they are little - it’s so much harder when you get older. I so wish I’d been taught another language when I was little. It can be a valuable skill as an adult, too. [/hijack]
Now returning you to your regularly scheduled thread.
Could you get this thesis to me easily?
It would make useful reading and probably provide backing for some of my job ideas!
Thanks.
I think he’s got it on his computer. I’ll ask him to send it to you.
romansperson,
I’ve had some material delivered - thanks!
My father taught me how to play when I was about six or seven. It took me about three years to beat him (he’s not brilliant - I was just very obvious player.) In seventh form I rediscovered it - my friends and me would wag school to play chess in the local Starbucks. (Even rebelling I was a geek.) I still have a friends I play with every week at Starbucks. I’d like to play other people but I get nevous and make stupid mistakes when someone else is watching, so playing a stranger is pretty much out of the question.
Just wanted to check back in and thank everyone for their responses. My five-year-old was itching for a computer chess game, so I picked up a copy of Fritz & Chesster for him to play with, but wasn’t sure if he was old enough to grok it. Nice to know the subject is probably not too far over his head…
No-one’s yet mentioned the game’s answer to Mozart, J. R. Capablanca. He learned to play at age 4 by watching his father with a friend, and revealed he knew how to play when he mocked his father for cheating (moving a knight two squares diagonally, and getting away with it). His father promptly challenged him to put up, and he did. Capa snr then took son to a chess club where an unsuspecting player, Don Ramon Iglesias, gave him Queen odds. This was a mistake. Some years later, the former child prodigy beat an aging Dr Emanuel Lasker for the World Championship. He was regarded as unbeatable in tournament play for many years.
Sadly, he under-prepared for his title defence against Alexander Alekhine, lost a hard-fought match, and under the rules at the time had to wait for a return match until Alekhine was good and ready… and the unscrupulous Alekhine was careful to ensure that he never would be.
Granted this is no more grounds for arguing that four-year-olds can and should learn to play than Mozart’s own career demonstrates that six-year-olds should compose symphonies, but it’s a nice story nonetheless. And at least it means that Don Ramon Iglesias earned a kind of immortality.