When you play games with your kids, do you let them win?

[SKL]

I don't often play games with my kids.  When I do, I try to be on a more or less even level with them.  I don't try to use strategies they aren't ready for.  Sometimes I will tell them why I'm about to do xyz so they can figure that into their next move.  They can take losing some of the time, but it's no fun to lose all of the time.  I actually quit playing chess as a kid because I had more advanced siblings and never ever won.  :P

[Alice]

I don't usually deliberately throw games but I may adjust rules based on age of the child to make it possible for a younger child to win. My daughter does get upset sometimes when she loses, it's usually more of an issue when her brothers beat her. What has worked the most is to explain that if she is going to get upset than we can't play those games. Not as a punishment but just as a matter-of-fact statement. "If you are going to scream and have a tantrum than we can't let you play because it's not fun." That doesn't work during the meltdown but we remind her before we start and if she is starting to get upset we'll just gently ask "Are you sure you want to play this? Or would you rather do something else?" 

 

I will throw a game that I absolutely hate and just want to be done. Candyland would be one of those. Although it's fairly rare I'll play those anymore. That's what siblings are for, in my opinion. :) 

[Punks in Ontario]

I voted that I would let them win under a certain age.  More accurately, this has more to do with the maturity to handle losing.  I would never let even a small child win all the time.  We've tried to model grace in losing and teach them to as well.

 

Likewise until they're able to win at least some of the time, we play "easy" with them.  If we think the can hold their own, I'm all for winning.

[vonfirmath]

Maybe I'll try this next.  I got the app, and it just swizzles my brain.  The cards change really fast and I just don't get what it's doing.  I need the physical cards and to move them around myself I think, lol.  If two people can play it, that's even better.  And it seems like Fluxx might be protracted enough, you could just agree to play for a time frame and then STOP and not even worry about winning/losing.

 

I do have one friend who refuses to play the game because the constantly shifting rules are not fun for her.

 

My husband and I played this game on our first date and afterwards a LOT. It's a great two player game

 

Different games of Fluxx will last different times. Just depends on when the cards come up. But my experience is that it is mostly a fairly fast game. it is rare to get through the entire deck and have to reshuffle.

[lynn]

Sometimes I have because I get bored and want to be done. But most times it is whoever wins, wins. We have tried to teach the kids to be good winner and a good loser. if they get an attitude because of losing we simply clean up the game and walk away for no one wants to be around a sore loser.

[lynn]

Sometimes I have because I get bored and want to be done. But most times it is whoever wins, wins. We have tried to teach the kids to be good winner and a good loser. if they get an attitude because of losing we simply clean up the game and walk away for no one wants to be around a sore loser.

[rocassie]

I do not "let" anyone win, but when the kids are under 5 (or thereabouts), I adjust rules or "help" them play the game.  For example, playing memory, I don't go again if I get a match.  Once the kiddo is doing pretty well on there own, then that rule goes away.  It just isn't fun for them nor does it allow them to actually play the game, if I always play at my ability.  

 

Games do not always have to be about winning or being competitive.  Taking turns, following rules, strategy, and logic are all things that playing games can teach someone.  As the kids get to be elementary age, I move from "helping", softening the rules, and adjusting my playing so it's more at their level to play more naturally and letting them figure out for themselves.

 

As for ultra-competitiveness, I do not allow taunting or belitting (either by the winner or the loser), I do not put up with pouting/tantrums because of losing.  Yes, you can be upset/disappointed/mad, and take some time to get over it (either by moving onto another activity, declining to play again, or finding a place for privacy/quietness.)  If need be, taking a break from games in the future may be needed.

[Dmmetler]

I've been looking at that, lol! Can munchkin be played with 2 people? I know there was some reason I didn't buy it yet. Actually, I'm afraid it will blow my mind. That and Flux, lol.

Yes, although it's more fun with more players (and you may want to filter the deck because so,e cards are hard to use with only 2 players).

[Guest]

I didn't let him win but when it was a clear advantage to have experience or knowledge he could not possibly have obtained yet, I would spit him a piece or a bit of knowledge.

 

When he was little, we would play Sorry and if let him star with one man out. Or when we played Scrabble, he'd get two more tiles. Or when we played a math-crossword kind of game he loved, he could use the operation he was learning but I could not.

[6packofun]

Yes, we do some losing occasionally on purpose--more random like someone else mentioned, depending on the circumstances and the game.  BUT, what is most helpful is playing cooperative games interspersed with the competitive games!  We have several choices here and ds8 has learned a lot  about strategy, taking losses together, responding well, handling intense situations, etc. with these.  And we get to model positive examples of losing gracefully and STILL having fun.

 

The most recent cooperative game we got is Zombie Kidz which is like a mini version of Zombie 15 and Pandemic, sort of.  He loves it, I love it because it's short, and it has a built in way of making the game slightly more difficult. 

[myfunnybunch]

I said I let them win under a certain age. It was pretty young, I'd say four-ish.

 

Otherwise, whoever wins, wins.

 

I didn't do anything particular. My middle both loved games and hated losing. He's mostly grown out of melting down or grumping if he doesn't win. My oldest ds struggles, but he will often choose not to play games because of it. When he does play, he's usually a good sport about winning or losing though.

 

Cat

[Tanaqui]

I'm not answering the poll just yet, but I'll take a stab at commenting. (Haven't read other comments!)

 

1. I do not trounce other players just because I can. This is poor sportsmanship. If I see that the other player - at any age! - is incapable of playing at my level, although I don't let them win, I make my win gracious. Nobody likes to lose 427 to 23.

 

2. When I am entering a game where I know the players are at different levels - and being five automatically counts as being less capable - the ones who are less able to play get a formal handicap. This might mean that they get to take a second draw if the first isn't good (but they have to keep one of the two draws, they can't just keep drawing forever), that they can pass a turn if they have no good options, that they are allowed to take back particularly bad moves so long as they do so before the next player's turn, or whatever else is appropriate for the game in question. Sometimes they get informal handicaps - I might say "Oooh, are you sure you want to make that move?" if it's a really bad one but they just don't see it, or "I'd move here" if they're clearly stalling and not sure what to do next. This makes the game more fair, and more fun for everybody.

 

3. When the kids were little, I did sometimes let them win a game. Not every time, because with two kids that's simply not possible, but some of the time, if we were playing more than one game in a sitting. This is sort of a handicap - they play one game where anybody can win, then one game where they win, and they don't feel like they ALWAYS are the one who LOSES. Then we had a chance to model gracious losing behavior and emphasize that the point is to have fun.

[texasmama]

The only games I let my kids win have been the poke your eyes out games like Candyland and Chutes and Ladders.  I let them win (and cheat to do so) so the game can finally end.  Fortunately, these are games for preschoolers so they are time-limited.

 

If my kid consistently played a game that made him cry and have a melt-down, I would probably put up that game for awhile.  I would consider bringing it out once a week as a learning tool and walking him through the process of dealing with his feelings, including repeating such language as "This is a game.  I can win or I can lose.  It's okay if I lose/don't win."  I would do this before starting the game, probably making up a fun chant with silly faces.  At the first sign of melting down, I would become animated and say, "Oh, we have to say our fun chant together now!" and proceed to do it a lot, maybe marching around or something for effect.  Then I would reward for losing and not melting down in whatever way that is meaningful for the kid.  (But I tend to be a behaviorist so there's that...)

 

I would not let him win to help him feel better.  I would not play a game with him that is far above his ability knowing I will always win if it causes consistent melt-downs.  (I have no idea about this particular game - never heard of it.)

[Melissa in Australia]

No we do not let kids win. winning here is based on either chance or skill, depending on the game.  if the child is skillful to beat dad in a game, theyare super excited as they have just had a major achievement as it happens very very rarely. Beating Mum is no challenge. My brain cannot focus on a game for more than 2 minutes as I start to think of all the chores I  should be doing instead and fail to notice finer details.

[PeterPan]

I do have one friend who refuses to play the game because the constantly shifting rules are not fun for her.

 

My husband and I played this game on our first date and afterwards a LOT. It's a great two player game

 

Different games of Fluxx will last different times. Just depends on when the cards come up. But my experience is that it is mostly a fairly fast game. it is rare to get through the entire deck and have to reshuffle.

Ironically, Fluxx is something therapists are using precisely to work on cognitive rigidity and flexibility issues, go figure.  So the game your friend avoids is the game she most needs to play!  Sounds like I'll have to get it and get it figured out.  Thanks for the push!  :)

[Dmmetler]

One of the best adaptations for kids I've seen is to allow dictionary use in scrabble. Not only does it make it easier for someone who is still learning to spell and has a smaller vocabulary, but it teaches dictionary use 😄

[PeterPan]

The only games I let my kids win have been the poke your eyes out games like Candyland and Chutes and Ladders.  I let them win (and cheat to do so) so the game can finally end.  Fortunately, these are games for preschoolers so they are time-limited.

 

If my kid consistently played a game that made him cry and have a melt-down, I would probably put up that game for awhile.  I would consider bringing it out once a week as a learning tool and walking him through the process of dealing with his feelings, including repeating such language as "This is a game.  I can win or I can lose.  It's okay if I lose/don't win."  I would do this before starting the game, probably making up a fun chant with silly faces.  At the first sign of melting down, I would become animated and say, "Oh, we have to say our fun chant together now!" and proceed to do it a lot, maybe marching around or something for effect.  Then I would reward for losing and not melting down in whatever way that is meaningful for the kid.  (But I tend to be a behaviorist so there's that...)

 

I would not let him win to help him feel better.  I would not play a game with him that is far above his ability knowing I will always win if it causes consistent melt-downs.  (I have no idea about this particular game - never heard of it.)

Yup, that's what I needed.  I think the fun chant with minor modifications.  The game is within his ability, though probably the fact that we played it 2+ hours (I sorta lost track) had something to do with it.  I'm thinking we could set a timer and take breaks.  But yes, that wording is what we're going to have to work on.  We did it a lot with shorter games, but going to longer games is a new twist.  Once he starts to figure out he might lose, he gets really anxious.  I've done things like letting him trade sides (the ultimate handicap, hehe), and that sometimes helps.  

 

Anyways, thanks, yes that's what we need to do, the fun chant.

[LucyStoner]

Sometimes I did when they were little.

 

My older son got over any hints of being a bad loser by regularly playing chess with people who challenged him. He's a good sport about winning and losing.

 

My younger son just likes to play and while competitive about some things doesn't seem to care if he loses a game of chance or skill.

 

We also play a lot of cooperative games.

[Tanaqui]

I thought of something else I'll put in here.

 

When we play a game, the people who know how to play better model good strategy. If I'm playing rummy 500 and I pick up the whole pile, when I put down a card I just picked up I say "I'm putting down this three because you already saw me pick it up, so you know I have it. If I put down another card, you'd know about this three, and it wouldn't be as valuable, plus, I might accidentally put down a card you can use!". Or I might think aloud "Gee, I could pick up that jack and ten right there and hope for a queen... but didn't I see you pick up that queen earlier? You haven't put it down. I should definitely pick those up to keep you from them, but I don't think I'll get a chance to use them!" or maybe "I'm putting down this ace now, even though it's a valuable card, because I'm worried she will close and I don't want it stuck in my hand."

 

This means they don't have to stumble their way blind into playing better, they get little tips both as to the sort of reasoning they can use AND ALSO the sort of reasoning their opponent (me!) uses, which - as they develop their own play - will only come in handy in learning to beat me.

[JeanM]

We are the same as some previous posters. We help them make strategic choices, we don't play super aggressively, but typically we don't just throw the game. We also played cooperative games when they were small, like Harvest Time. My DS 8 is just now to the point where he doesn't get a little weepy about losing.

 

Harvest Time was the first cooperative game we bought when my oldest was very young. He didn't just cry when he lost, he also cried when he won. He cried for the pain that the other person (people) suffered in losing.

 

[Tangerine]

Harvest Time was the first cooperative game we bought when my oldest was very young. He didn't just cry when he lost, he also cried when he won. He cried for the pain that the other person (people) suffered in losing.

 

 

Sensitive boys!  :wub:  Infuriatingly sweet sometimes.

[Tanaqui]

Harvest Time was the first cooperative game we bought when my oldest was very young. He didn't just cry when he lost, he also cried when he won. He cried for the pain that the other person (people) suffered in losing.

 

 

That is adorable. I mean, I'm sure it was more frustrating/upsetting at the time (especially for him!) but... that's adorable!

 

[Seeking Squirrels]

We let my first win when she was very young but we stopped by 3 years old or so. She does NOT handle losing well at all. It's even been a topic of discussion with her therapist before. She flips out. We've had to take games away for extended periods because her reaction to losing was so bad. We are starting to maybe make a little progress now. Playing cooperative games has helped because then we all win or we all lose together. We've also started walking through how we will handle the end of the game before we even start playing. It's hit or miss right now. With our second, I haven't ever let her win and she never cares if she wins or loses. I don't know if it's because we let our oldest win when she was little or just personality. I suspect personality more than anything.

 

ETA: To even the playing field and make it so we don't have to "let" them win but neither are we stomping them, we have adjusted rules for kids. They know the rules are different for them and it's just part of how we play. This evens things out more and gives everyone a roughly equal shot at winning. For example with memory, kids keep going after making a match, adults get one go even if they make one. A game called Labyrinth that involves turning over cards one at a time and finding the treasure, we allow her to turn over three at a time and choose from those, always pulling a new card to keep her at three options while we have only one. Things like that.

[PeterPan]

I thought of something else I'll put in here.

 

When we play a game, the people who know how to play better model good strategy. If I'm playing rummy 500 and I pick up the whole pile, when I put down a card I just picked up I say "I'm putting down this three because you already saw me pick it up, so you know I have it. If I put down another card, you'd know about this three, and it wouldn't be as valuable, plus, I might accidentally put down a card you can use!". Or I might think aloud "Gee, I could pick up that jack and ten right there and hope for a queen... but didn't I see you pick up that queen earlier? You haven't put it down. I should definitely pick those up to keep you from them, but I don't think I'll get a chance to use them!" or maybe "I'm putting down this ace now, even though it's a valuable card, because I'm worried she will close and I don't want it stuck in my hand."

 

This means they don't have to stumble their way blind into playing better, they get little tips both as to the sort of reasoning they can use AND ALSO the sort of reasoning their opponent (me!) uses, which - as they develop their own play - will only come in handy in learning to beat me.

Great idea!!!

[texasmama]

Yup, that's what I needed.  I think the fun chant with minor modifications.  The game is within his ability, though probably the fact that we played it 2+ hours (I sorta lost track) had something to do with it.  I'm thinking we could set a timer and take breaks.  But yes, that wording is what we're going to have to work on.  We did it a lot with shorter games, but going to longer games is a new twist.  Once he starts to figure out he might lose, he gets really anxious.  I've done things like letting him trade sides (the ultimate handicap, hehe), and that sometimes helps.  

 

Anyways, thanks, yes that's what we need to do, the fun chant.

In order to continue desensitizing him to anxiety around losing or not doing well, you could use this game and set a timer and when it goes off (10 minutes?), switch sides continuously.  Laugh and carry on like that is the funnest thing ever.  (You know, if you are a silly kind of person.  I am so this comes very naturally to me.)  Keep it up for a while. 

[PeterPan]

Oh duh, did it really take me this long to realize we could play ST Catan cooperatively?  LOL  (hangs head in shame)  

 

Like not even just helping but still losing, but actually just making it cooperative, we're done when we've both played everything.  Duh, that's what he's liking is the strategy and sequencing.  Then he could enjoy that without the worry of competition.  And that's sort of a pallatable way to put it, do you want to play cooperatively or competitively this round...  That would be something he could handle.

 

 

[texasmama]

Oh duh, did it really take me this long to realize we could play ST Catan cooperatively?  LOL  (hangs head in shame)  

 

Like not even just helping but still losing, but actually just making it cooperative, we're done when we've both played everything.  Duh, that's what he's liking is the strategy and sequencing.  Then he could enjoy that without the worry of competition.  And that's sort of a pallatable way to put it, do you want to play cooperatively or competitively this round...  That would be something he could handle.

Gauging where he is (and helping him to do this for himself by processing it aloud), you can discuss competitive or cooperative play and help guide him to the choice that fits him best for the day.  Then you are teaching self-awareness and self-regulation while you play.  (And it is very palatable way to get this done, while playing a fun game.)

[Jenny in Florida]

While I don't believe in letting kids win, I do absolutely believe in finding ways to make it possible for a child to actually be competitive.

 

I don't know the Catan games and so can't give you any specific ideas. However, we used to routinely tweak the way games were played so as to give younger kids a fighting chance. They might get double points, for example, or start each game with more money or pieces or cards or get a certain pre-ordained number of "do-overs." We also looked for games that could be played on two levels. For example, we have a Disney-themed trivia game that has different question sets for adults and kids.

 

It's no fun to play when you always lose, and I'm extremely sympathetic to that. On the other hand, I absolutely hated it when I figured out that adults were letting me win. I was embarrassed and felt stupid for thinking that I had actually won. So, I vowed not to try and fool my kids similarly. The compromise of just creating a framework or a set of house rules that made it possible for them to play for real worked out nicely for us.

[Jenny in Florida]

I forgot to mention something else we did:

 

When our kids were younger and wanted to play games that were beyond their abilities to play well, we would sometimes offer to play transparently. This worked especially well when my son wanted to play chess with my husband.

 

Basically, the adult would "think aloud" while pondering each move. It gave the younger player an advantage and also helped him or her learn how to play better next time.

 

The adult would often still win, but the kiddo tended to view it as a learning experience, rather than a straight-up competition.

[Laurie4b]

Well, I couldn't vote because I only had an answer for one question.

 

I cheated shamelessly at Candy Land so that my children would win... not to protect their feelings, but to get the game over with!  Do any parents play Candy Land honestly?

[8circles]

You need an "other" option.

 

I help my younger kids throughout the game so they can actually learn how to win.  But I don't emphasize winning anyway - we talk about good moves or not-so-good moves or getting good cards and being lucky etc.

 

I guess I combine this with playing down a bit, too.  But sometimes I win, sometimes the kids.  It just depends.

[LucyStoner]

Well, I couldn't vote because I only had an answer for one question.

 

I cheated shamelessly at Candy Land so that my children would win... not to protect their feelings, but to get the game over with! Do any parents play Candy Land honestly?

Yeah, that's not letting anyone win, it's mom's get out of jail free card when all the child wants to do is play Candyland and everyone else would rather perform their own appendectomy than sit though a another never ending game of Candyland.

[Tsuga]

Other and other. :)

 

We are all super competitive and playing games is miserable but we continue to do it compulsively because we are like that. We don't let them win but we do give them strategic hints, which makes anyone between 10-50 feel slightly condescended to and irritable.

 

I guess in that respect, on game nights we are not a pleasant family to be around!  :lol:

 

 

 

did it really take me this long to realize we could play ST Catan cooperatively?

 

Depends what you mean by "could". I have no intention of cooperating as I'm playing to win...

 

[Tsuga]

Well, I couldn't vote because I only had an answer for one question.

 

I cheated shamelessly at Candy Land so that my children would win... not to protect their feelings, but to get the game over with!  Do any parents play Candy Land honestly?

 

Candyland is a whole different ballgame. The answer is no, nobody will let that game go on forever. All I can think playing that game is that Monopoly was supposedly turned down for like a hundred defects or something, but NOBODY VETOED CANDYLAND. Why.

 

All subsequent posts tonight can be ignored. I made the best drink ever for my partner and myself and I can't even feel my fingertips!

[vonfirmath]

Well, I couldn't vote because I only had an answer for one question.

 

I cheated shamelessly at Candy Land so that my children would win... not to protect their feelings, but to get the game over with!  Do any parents play Candy Land honestly?

 

Me.We have enough games that it doesn't get played a LOT and so I don't feel I need to "Get it over with"

 

I have refused to play it more than 3 times in one day. "Time for another game or lets go do something else"

 

[Momling]

I never cheat to let kids win, but I do try to play games of chance rather than skill with younger kids. I also warn my kids that I may not want to play with them again if they get upset when they lose. So we'll make a little pact that it's okay to lose before we even begin.

[DawnM]

The only child I have who can't lose well is my Aspie.  He has been this way since Candyland.  He is my all or nothing kid.  There is not really any helping him ALTHOUGH I have to say, he has gotten better in some ways.  He now goes to magic the gathering tournaments and can sit and just seethe internally while losing instead of showing it too openly.  I know which nights those are because when I pick him up he declares he will NEVER go back and play with "those cheaters."   :lol:

 

But I am proud of him.  He goes back and still seems to want to.

[Muttichen]

We gave our kids some kind of handicap when they were little (e.g., playing chess, dad would play without a queen).  It wasn't long before they were usually creaming us, so it wasn't an issue!

 

My youngest ds is EXTREMELY competitive.  About everything.  When he was little and he had to flip a coin for math to learn probability, he chose what side he wanted to win and went to pieces if the other one got ahead.  I never tolerated "meltdowns." If he had a tantrum after losing a game, he'd get a spanking. If he just cried or sulked, I'd tell him to buck up and we'd move on to something else. I didn't try to curb his competitive nature.  He's still very competitive and it's pushed him to do great things.  He needed to learn to control himself when things went wrong, though.

[Tanaqui]

I never cheat to let kids win, but I do try to play games of chance rather than skill with younger kids.

 

I take the opposite approach.

 

With a game of chance, you get a on a losing streak and you can't do anything to fix it. How frustrating! With a game of skill (and an appropriate handicap for the unskilled), you can simply play better, if not this time, then next time.

[Mergath]

I don't let dd win, but with the kid games that make me want to knock myself unconscious to get out of playing, I don't always play as well as I could. ;)  But with games where dd wants to improve, like chess and Yugioh, I don't let her win.  She has to earn the win.  I'm not doing her any favors if I make her believe she's a chess pro by letting her beat me a dozen times, and then she plays another kid and gets stomped.

[FriedClams]

.

[FriedClams]

I feel the need to confess...

 

I cheated regularly at games with my kids when they were little...to make the game end. Oh wow. The guy who created Chutes and Ladders...I hate you. Same with Sorry. What a horrid, mean game. Monopoly how I loathe you.

 

Now, there are others that I loved and we played often. Hullabaloo...Labyrinth...Yahtzee (until my son scored, legitimately 610 points one game...I retired)....Headbanz...Apples to Apples...

 

But others...oiy...I made the madness end. I recently owned up to my kids and they laughed a ton.