Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 21 May '07 15:48
    I wonder how young you can start teaching kids chess. I have twins that are only 2 1/2yrs old right now, and don't think they can learn anything yet, but I wondered how early people have started learning before.

    I also wonder how you can progress a child from a beginning game with simple moves.

    I'm amazed at the skill of those K-1 Elementary kids (wow!)
  2. Standard member irontigran
    Rob Scheider is..
    21 May '07 15:52
    if it were me, i wouldnt start out with the king like most teachings do....id just put a knight and a bishop on the board and have them play one on one with those for a while..
  3. 21 May '07 16:33
    Well my sister is only 1yr10mths and she already knows names of the pieces. Though she has no understanding of how they move. But the faster you start to teach, the better the kid will play. Just remember that you need to make it as fun. Make him want to play. Let him win you a fw times so kid gets some confidence, otherwise he/she would lose the interest quick.
  4. Standard member adam warlock
    Baby Gauss
    21 May '07 16:35
    Originally posted by kbaumen
    Make him want to play. Let him win you a fw times so kid gets some confidence, otherwise he/she would lose the interest quick.
    I really think that's pretty non-educational. Better is to teach the young ones that winning is good and important but more important is to win.
  5. 21 May '07 16:40
    Originally posted by adam warlock
    I really think that's pretty non-educational. Better is to teach the young ones that winning is good and important but more important is to win.
    Do I smell sarcasm? (Can I really smell something from a computer, if it's not a burn?) But you are right. Participation is actually a very important thing, however, wining is the main goal.
  6. Standard member Ragnorak
    For RHP addons...
    21 May '07 16:43 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by kbaumen
    Do I smell sarcasm? (Can I really smell something from a computer, if it's not a burn?) But you are right. Participation is actually a very important thing, however, wining is the main goal.
    I believe I heard this from wulebrg, but he suggests that you rotate the board when an obvious tactic arises. That way the kid gets to win, and learns from his/her mistakes.

    D
  7. 21 May '07 16:44
    Originally posted by Ragnorak
    I believe I heard this from wulebrg, but he suggests that you rotate the board when an obvious tactic arises. That way the kid gets to win, and learns from his/her mistakes.

    D
    Sounds like a good idea.
  8. Standard member adam warlock
    Baby Gauss
    21 May '07 16:53
    Originally posted by kbaumen
    Sounds like a good idea.
    Pretty good idea. And no sarcasm was intended on the last post.
  9. 21 May '07 16:54
    Originally posted by adam warlock
    Pretty good idea. And no sarcasm was intended on the last post.
    A typo then? I understood it as sarcasm.
    winning is good and important but more important is to win.
  10. Standard member adam warlock
    Baby Gauss
    21 May '07 16:58
    Originally posted by kbaumen
    A typo then? I understood it as sarcasm.
    winning is good and important but more important is to win.
    Typo. Haven't realized that till now. It was meant to be that more important is to learn. Freudian slip maybe.
  11. Standard member irontigran
    Rob Scheider is..
    21 May '07 16:58
    you have a chance to make your kids really smart with this game, so they already will be winning, just make it fun
  12. 21 May '07 17:22
    A few years ago, I read of an idea one father tried when beginning to teach his young child the game. After the child could successfully identify all the pieces by name, the father would place one piece in the bag and let the child feel (but not see) the piece and the child would then have to identify the piece by feel alone. It sounded like a good way to make the learning process fun.
  13. 21 May '07 17:51
    Originally posted by AlboMalapropFoozer
    A few years ago, I read of an idea one father tried when beginning to teach his young child the game. After the child could successfully identify all the pieces by name, the father would place one piece in the bag and let the child feel (but not see) the piece and the child would then have to identify the piece by feel alone. It sounded like a good way to make the learning process fun.
    I like this. You may also try other games with them as well. Get as many pieces of the same type as you can, and tell the child to place (for instance, all the Queens) all the pieces of the same type on the board so that no two pieces are attacking the same square. It is fun, challenging, and will teach piece movement, and position control.
  14. Standard member irontigran
    Rob Scheider is..
    21 May '07 17:56
    Originally posted by AlphaAlekhine
    I like this. You may also try other games with them as well. Get as many pieces of the same type as you can, and tell the child to place (for instance, all the Queens) all the pieces of the same type on the board so that no two pieces are attacking the same square. It is fun, challenging, and will teach piece movement, and position control.
    yes, this is a better idea than them playing someone...fun little mini-puzzles to build them up.
  15. Subscriber Marinkatomb
    wotagr8game
    21 May '07 19:09
    Originally posted by Ragnorak
    I believe I heard this from wulebrg, but he suggests that you rotate the board when an obvious tactic arises. That way the kid gets to win, and learns from his/her mistakes.

    D
    Yeh, until the kid twigs and starts setting up elaborate mates in their own position to finish you off with style.