I’ve done a similar thing. I started Attacklass (11) and Attacklad (8) off at 5 or 6 with a full side, and I had pawns and a king. Each time they beat me 3 times, I’d take another piece, or a stronger piece, and gradually increase my side - they’d also get some kind of congratulatory treat. We also play full board teaching games and puzzles and such, but beating dad is the ultimate goal. Attacklass is currently playing me full board, and has a ruthless devious style. They’re also both purists, with solid knowledge of the rules and a touch-move touch-take ethos. The main benefit of this approach has been, as Cavemike has noted, that both sides play to win, full bore, no sympathy, and when they win, they know that they really won. Plus I get a good game. My chess skills have probably increased as much as theirs have. I suspect **Attacklad **is currently a better player than I was when we started.
In my senior year of high school I volunteered (or “volunteered”) at the library of a public elementary school. One of my duties was to assist the chess teacher who came in on Mondays to instruct the young’uns. I guess I only have two observation to offer from that experience:
-
Some kids will show an affinity for chess and some won’t; it sounds like your daughter is in the former camp, so this one isn’t an issue.
-
Don’t go into anything too esoteric until your daughter’s interest is very well established. For instance, the chess teacher I assisted tried teaching en passant capturing to his group of 7 year olds who’d been playing chess once a week for two months, and even the kids who were clearly enjoying the sessions had a big ??? on their faces and spent the whole period trying in vein to figure out ways to utilize a rule that very rarely comes up.
In one of his golf instruction books, Jack Nicklaus says that when teaching kids and young teenagers, you should encourage them to rip the hell out of the ball – it’s not the best strategy for lowering your score, but it’s fun, and keeping the kids interested is more important that maximizing their efficiency. I think the same thing applies to chess: keep it fun for the kids, even if it means giving them theoretically sub-optimal advice.
I meant something like 1. e4 b5. My particular peeve is P-r4. That’s usually where I fail them and make them start over. The reason isn’t to keep them playing particular moves, it’s because they’re not using the principles. I accompany it with a comment like “What does that have to do with developing, controlling the center, or castling? Start over, try again. This time, use your rules.” Rules=principles&themes.
Yes indeed. With full encouragement from my school, I once tried teaching an entire school year group chess (120 eleven year olds; I took them in 6 separate groups, so each group got about 6 weekly lessons).
They were pretty polite about it 
and I discovered quite a few with natural ability, but I needed to work hard to appeal to the majority during the course(who afterwards gave the game up).
Sadly chess is not a game for everyone - although parents were pleased that their kid’s concentration level had usually improved.
Absolutely (as I mentioned in post 9 
)
No, I don’t agree with this. There’s a huge difference between physical games where you know what you want to do, but have to learn how to physically do it and mental games - which are the opposite.
Yes, it should be interesting - but understanding chess demands accuracy.
When I taught soccer (to kids who weren’t in any of the many school teams), we had a short skill session, then played a game and finished by taking penalties. The idea (as Nicklaus said) was almost all about keeping their interest.
But being taught bad habits early at chess can mar your game for life. :eek: 
Pupils have to absorb a lot and it’s vital all the pieces* fit together.
*a little pun there - but they do need to learn so much: how pieces move, what their values are, how to avoid blunders and learn tactics and strategy…
OK, thanks for amplifying.
I have two suggestions:
-
if they make blunders or really weak moves in the opening, it would be better to work with less pieces until they learn how to analyse and study the board.
Teach them endings and basic checkmates.
Openings are extremely complicated and even Grandmasters can be surprised by a new move that breaks a ‘principle’. -
It’s very hard for them to understand why they are wrong (“because I say so!”:smack: ), plus restarting is depressing.
How about playing a game where one player breaks at least one of the opening guideliness (not allowed to move or attack e4/d4/e5/d5; not allowed to castle/ only allowed to move pawns) and learns there are consequences?
OK, I’ve started a thread challenging CaveMike’s children to a game here.
If any other kids like the idea, I can do more games. 
My 13-year-old son Jordan says he’s game …
I have nothing to add here, but wanted to show this really cool chess set.
I accept the challenge!
How much experience has Jordan got?
(This will affect how many moves he can take back - and similar bonuses.)
I will play Black, as I drew White in the the first game here.
We will use algebraic notation, and here is the thread.
That is nice (I wonder why they mentioned former World Champion Anatoly Karpov?).
Here are some others:
I taught him when he was around six or seven; he’d probably played no more than a dozen games over the years, then got really interested this year & started going to his junior high school’s chess club … He’s played a lot of chess against other kids over the past six months, but hasn’t had any significant instruction. (I thought about getting him a book of some kind for Christmas, but didn’t.)
So anyway, don’t take it too easy on him. 
We’re well through our studies of basic checkmates and endgames. They have no problems finishing with a Q and with some thought can get through a R ending easily. With a lone pawn, they struggle a little.
I don’t respond with “Because I say so” to “What did I do wrong?” but instead to “Why do we have to restart?” To what they did wrong, they know full well what they did. I’m not punishing ignorance here, I’m punishing lack of discipline. It’s not that they don’t know what they did wrong, it’s that they don’t care. Restarting lets them know that this is a “You have to try” game and not a “You don’t have to care” game. It’s not to adjust their chess (they know what needs played) but to adjust their attitude.
Second link disnae work, sensei. You get the “Start new thread” page.
The quote was pretty good.
Well, our copy of Fritz and Chesster is on the way and we’ve started with some of the basics. We played around with some of the basic moves when she was four and she remembers them more than I thought so we’re not going completely from scratch, should be fun. I’ve never looked so forward to losing a game as I am to the inevitable moment when she surpasses me!
Thanks for all the great advice everyone, especially glee of course, I look forward to learning something from your challenge threads.
Aye, that’s weird! Y’ken, I’d already posted it the once. 
Well, here it is again.
Now I’ve found the blooming original, so try looking here. :eek: