5 ms·

Solution: play something that has essentially zero strategy, where who wins is close to random. Like Ludo or Yahtzee. My daughter often wins at Ludo, but it's

Solution: play something that has essentially zero strategy, where who wins is close to random. Like Ludo or Yahtzee. My daughter often wins at Ludo, but it's not because I let her. She also often loses.

sirclueless 10y ago
If you can do it convincingly, you can probably play games involving some skill if you adopt a consistent and beatable strategy. Like Uno by playing the oldest legal card in your hand and choosing a color you hold randomly for wilds, or Guess Who by always choosing an attribute that about 1/4 of remaining characters share.
pbhjpbhj 10y ago
That's a partial solution. It doesn't help them with developing winning strategies if the outcome is random. Nor does it help them develop determination; nor, I wager, resilience to losing. I want my kids to beat me, not just win by chance.
ordu 10y ago
Its not a solution, I believe. Random success is not based on decision making skills. Random success will teach child to make random decisions. Just not be afraid to really lose to your child in game which at start equally unknown for both you and your child. Let your child to learn how to win and learn how to learn to win. As an example of such a learning: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11653538 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11653538 If you or your child do not like chess, you can choose any other game, which allows your child to use his fluent mind strengths to win you. Just stop thinking that child is small, stupid and unable to win a fair game. He really can win, but not the games where your crystallized mind has its advantages.
- NPMaxwell 10y ago
  I'm guessing that you meant to type "learn how to win and learn how to lose", which is a great point. Understanding how to move forward happily after failure is a huge asset.
  - inimino 10y ago
    That is another good point but I think they meant to type what they typed.
  - ordu 10y ago
    Yes, you are right, game maybe used to teach child to lose. And of course should be used in such manner. But I meant something different. Learning how to play particular game is a small step to aquiring general learning skills. How to learn is a great problem, and many do not know efficient ways to learn something. But its very important not only to move forward after a failure, but to become smarter and increase chances of making successful decisions on the next occasion to win.
Uhhrrr 10y ago
Another one: handicapping. Chess with rook odds, or Go with a few handicap stones.
- krrrh 10y ago
  Recently I got into this relatively new iOS app called Really Bad Chess that is a lot of fun along these lines. My partner was never taught Chess but wanted to learn, and this made it entertaining to get started for both of us. http://reallybadchess.com http://reallybadchess.com
johnloeber 10y ago
Ludo's fundamental, underlying lesson is that your actions don't matter at all. (The player has literally no agency in the game, it could be equivalently played by a RNG.) That doesn't seem like a good parenting lesson. A board game should be an opportunity to develop strategic thinking skills, rather than teaching the child that they're irrelevant.
- ern 10y ago
  The player has literally no agency in the game A bit of a sidetrack, but Ludo does have decisions: which disc to move and how many spaces. Chasing vs rushing to complete. Whether to move a disc when a 6 is diced or to bring a new disc into play. Chutes/snakes and Ladders is pure luck.
- throwaway729 10y ago
  > That doesn't seem like a good parenting lesson Lots of things in life (good and bad) are pure luck. Handling things you "do/don't deserve" with appropriate emotional responses is a valuable life skill.
  - johnloeber 10y ago
    To be clear: the bad parenting lesson is that the child learns that their actions don't matter. Rolling the dice gives the illusion of agency, but of course the child does not actually get to make any decisions. Their actions do not map to any recognizable outcomes; they may as well act completely randomly. This strikes me as a bad thing to learn. > Lots of things in life (good and bad) are pure luck. Handling things you "do/don't deserve" with appropriate emotional responses is a valuable life skill. That is also true.
nommm-nommm 10y ago
Yahtzee has some strategy.
jdietrich 10y ago
Option 3: play games with substantial elements of chance and strategy. Card games are particularly good in this respect, but there are a wide variety of games where a completely unskilled player can occasionally win against a much more skilled opponent.
analog31 10y ago
Another option is a game where you're both playing against "something" but not really against one another. For instance in Scrabble, your opponent is really the language and your knowledge of it, rather than the other person. Plus luck, of course. Likewise the violin. There are "levels" to reach, and competitions, but ultimately it's down to you and the music and the instrument. The point where my daughter surpassed me on violin came remarkably quickly. Granted, I was trying to play along on the double bass.
- vic-traill 10y ago
  The musical part of your reply is interesting. As I read it, the idea occurred to me to learn a new instrument along with your child. My experience is that kids learn to play an instrument faster than an adult; even given that, they'll only progress along with you by practising, and it's a pretty cool way to spend time with your kid. Thanks for the inspiration.
sitkack 10y ago
This is exactly the problem the researchers are trying to avoid.

sirclueless 10y ago

If you can do it convincingly, you can probably play games involving some skill if you adopt a consistent and beatable strategy. Like Uno by playing the oldest legal card in your hand and choosing a color you hold randomly for wilds, or Guess Who by always choosing an attribute that about 1/4 of remaining characters share.

pbhjpbhj 10y ago

That's a partial solution. It doesn't help them with developing winning strategies if the outcome is random. Nor does it help them develop determination; nor, I wager, resilience to losing. I want my kids to beat me, not just win by chance.

ordu 10y ago

Its not a solution, I believe. Random success is not based on decision making skills. Random success will teach child to make random decisions. Just not be afraid to really lose to your child in game which at start equally unknown for both you and your child. Let your child to learn how to win and learn how to learn to win. As an example of such a learning: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11653538 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11653538 If you or your child do not like chess, you can choose any other game, which allows your child to use his fluent mind strengths to win you. Just stop thinking that child is small, stupid and unable to win a fair game. He really can win, but not the games where your crystallized mind has its advantages.

NPMaxwell 10y ago
I'm guessing that you meant to type "learn how to win and learn how to lose", which is a great point. Understanding how to move forward happily after failure is a huge asset.
- inimino 10y ago
  That is another good point but I think they meant to type what they typed.
- ordu 10y ago
  Yes, you are right, game maybe used to teach child to lose. And of course should be used in such manner. But I meant something different. Learning how to play particular game is a small step to aquiring general learning skills. How to learn is a great problem, and many do not know efficient ways to learn something. But its very important not only to move forward after a failure, but to become smarter and increase chances of making successful decisions on the next occasion to win.

Uhhrrr 10y ago

Another one: handicapping. Chess with rook odds, or Go with a few handicap stones.

krrrh 10y ago
Recently I got into this relatively new iOS app called Really Bad Chess that is a lot of fun along these lines. My partner was never taught Chess but wanted to learn, and this made it entertaining to get started for both of us. http://reallybadchess.com http://reallybadchess.com

johnloeber 10y ago

Ludo's fundamental, underlying lesson is that your actions don't matter at all. (The player has literally no agency in the game, it could be equivalently played by a RNG.) That doesn't seem like a good parenting lesson. A board game should be an opportunity to develop strategic thinking skills, rather than teaching the child that they're irrelevant.

ern 10y ago
The player has literally no agency in the game A bit of a sidetrack, but Ludo does have decisions: which disc to move and how many spaces. Chasing vs rushing to complete. Whether to move a disc when a 6 is diced or to bring a new disc into play. Chutes/snakes and Ladders is pure luck.
throwaway729 10y ago
> That doesn't seem like a good parenting lesson Lots of things in life (good and bad) are pure luck. Handling things you "do/don't deserve" with appropriate emotional responses is a valuable life skill.
- johnloeber 10y ago
  To be clear: the bad parenting lesson is that the child learns that their actions don't matter. Rolling the dice gives the illusion of agency, but of course the child does not actually get to make any decisions. Their actions do not map to any recognizable outcomes; they may as well act completely randomly. This strikes me as a bad thing to learn. > Lots of things in life (good and bad) are pure luck. Handling things you "do/don't deserve" with appropriate emotional responses is a valuable life skill. That is also true.

nommm-nommm 10y ago

Yahtzee has some strategy.

jdietrich 10y ago

Option 3: play games with substantial elements of chance and strategy. Card games are particularly good in this respect, but there are a wide variety of games where a completely unskilled player can occasionally win against a much more skilled opponent.

analog31 10y ago

Another option is a game where you're both playing against "something" but not really against one another. For instance in Scrabble, your opponent is really the language and your knowledge of it, rather than the other person. Plus luck, of course. Likewise the violin. There are "levels" to reach, and competitions, but ultimately it's down to you and the music and the instrument. The point where my daughter surpassed me on violin came remarkably quickly. Granted, I was trying to play along on the double bass.

vic-traill 10y ago
The musical part of your reply is interesting. As I read it, the idea occurred to me to learn a new instrument along with your child. My experience is that kids learn to play an instrument faster than an adult; even given that, they'll only progress along with you by practising, and it's a pretty cool way to spend time with your kid. Thanks for the inspiration.

sitkack 10y ago

This is exactly the problem the researchers are trying to avoid.