Win or lose: playing games with your children

Win or Lose: Playing Games With Your Children

Christian and I had worked hard fixing up our old shed. We had a good time working together--sawing, hammering, pounding, and cleaning--and to end the project on a high note, I bought some plywood and set up a Ping-Pong table in the middle of the newly cleared space. He was thrilled, and I had visions of happy half-hours spent knocking the ball around, laughing, and bantering.

After a few weeks, however, things began to go a little sour. Christian, at 13, was naturally athletic, and he improved his game quickly; but I still won. As the weeks wore on, he became increasingly frustrated. One day, in the middle of a game, he missed a shot and large tears began to roll gently down his face. I finally realized that the frustration of losing was beginning to overshadow the joy he felt in playing. As for me, although I had not been intent on winning (maybe because I already was?), I had been focusing so fully on playing that I was unaware of my son's mounting discouragement. So we stopped the game and began to volley and talk about different ways of slamming the ball. After that, we played Ping-Pong less frequently.

I knew that it was time to make a conscious decision about winning and losing while playing games with my children. The approach that I grew up with was obviously not working. Essentially, the philosophy was that you always play as hard as you can, regardless of the age and experience of your opponent. The belief was that every victory should be genuinely earned, not received as a "gift" from the opponent, and that letting another person win was dishonest.

Although I did not play many athletic games with my parents (unless you count croquet), the people in my extended family were all enthusiastic players of board and card games. The highlight of family reunions was the big penny-ante poker game that would start right after the food was cleared from the dining room table, and it would continue late into the evening. We children were permitted to play, but no allowances were to be made for us. I can remember sitting at the table with my pile of pennies and playing until I was wiped out. And when I was wiped out, that was it. This, I figured, is what games are all about.

When Parent and Child Play

Games

In playing games with our children, playing to win is not the only way to go. In fact, parent-as-competitor creates special problems. According to Lenard Lexier--a Norfolk, Virginia, psychiatrist with a special interest in the role of the father--the unfairness of the contest between parent and child changes the nature of the game. The parent must learn to view game playing primarily as a learning activity rather than as a competition, he notes.

Lexier believes that if games become focused on issues of power--on winning and losing--the child learns only that grown-ups are bigger. A more vital lesson to be learned is that grown-ups are resources who can help the child learn the rules and find ways to have fun. As Lexier explained during my recent interview with him, "The issue of games is really an issue of interactive learning. The adult learns about the child, and the child learns how adults think. If the grown-up is skillful, he or she can teach the child many things about life just by playing checkers." The interactive element is what makes game playing such a powerful learning tool.

What's more, the child's self-esteem is on the line each time he or she plays a game. Susan D. Shilcock--president of Open Connections Family Resource Center in Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania--points out that a child's ability to play competitive games depends on both developmental and contextual factors. A very young child, for example, does not distinguish between games of luck and games of skill. Children with a strong desire to win will think badly of themselves for losing, even if the particular game is based on chance. Shilcock has also observed that older children who can distinguish between skill and luck may still experience a blow to their self-concept, depending upon the particular day and the particular set of circumstances.

It all boils down to this: at some point, we must accept that the child and issues involving the child are more important than the game and issues involving victory and defeat. As parents, we must be careful about becoming so caught up in the game that we forget the opponent is a young, vulnerable child.

Going beyond Competition

Creating a healthy parent-child game environment does not require starting over at square one. It simply requires changing our point of view. One way to do this is to examine the elements underlying games as we know them and then capitalize on the positive aspects.

Hidden beneath even the most intensely competitive games is the dynamic of cooperation. Competitive games are in fact based on cooperation. The team that is victorious is the team that works well together. However, the essential cohesiveness of the team often goes unnoticed amid the players' heightened urge to defeat the opposition, to "win one for the Gipper."

Competitive games are based on cooperation in a deeper sense as well. The "world" created during the playing of a game is a direct result of the rules agreed to by the players. It is an artificial world. Nothing is inherently important, for example, in hitting a leather-covered ball with a wooden bat. Hitting the ball, running the bases, and adhering to the elaborate calls on strikes, balls, and fouls are important only because the participants agree that for a certain period of time and in a certain placE, they will be.

In the heat of competition, we lose sight of both the triviality of the activity and the mutuality of the beliefs. At Ohio State University in Columbus, where I both studied and taught, football is a king of religion. Every fall, the fervor culminates in the annual Michigan-Ohio State game, which is preceded by rallies and followed by celebrations and near-riots. To anyone not particularly interested in football, a Michigan fan and an Ohio State fan appear similar: they have in common a large body of beliefs, including the conviction that the game is important. To someone invested in the outcome, however, the game--even the fans--may take on an adversarial quality.

A third element underlying competitive games is that they work best when the sides are balanced. Lopsided victories tend to be dull--not only for the losers, but for the winners and the spectators as well. Tight competition, on the other hand, is thrilling; the more closely matched the players are, the more excitemet the game generates. Even after the victory, when the game itself is no longer interesting, the feeling of balance lives on in the retelling.

So keep in mind the principles of teamwork, common rules, and balance. Rely on them when things go awry, and use them as building blocks in formulating a nonhurtful and exciting approach to game playing.

Basic Strategies for Self-Esteem

and Learning

Avoid the luck factor with little ones. Many competitive games are based on luck--you roll the dice, you move your token, or you pick a card. The problem is that children, especially young ones, draw conclusions about themselves based on victory or defeat in these games. In addition, as Lexier has observed, these sorts of games offer little opportunity for learning anything other than the basics of how to play a game--how to take turns, sit still, and so on. Because competitive games of luck may introduce too much risk for too little return, it is far better to choose games of skill.

Even the odds. Numerous skill-based games favor the more knowledgeable, better coordinated, and more experienced adult over the child. Such games are best avoided or amended in some way. Those with complex rules need to be explained fully so that the child understands all directions and regulations before playing. Games involving reaction times, such as Slap Jack, are less desirable for young children than games that alternate turns, allowing the players to take their time. Games that require outside information often give the adult the advantage and should be avoided unless the child is already familiar with the subject. In question-and-answer games, make sure the questions have a range of difficulty so that you can choose from among more difficult ones than your child.

Changing the rules is one way to even up the contest. You might begin with three or four less checkers. Or you might decide to follow more stringent rules: one strike and the parent is out, or perhaps the child may be allowed an unlimited number of strikes. Finding the right mix of rule changes to balance the competition will take some experimentation. Be creative!

Modify the rules . . . consensually. Changing the rules at the outset is relatively simple, but changing them while the game is in progress can get tricky. Yet, such changes may become necessary. Partway through a game, it may become evident that a previous rule change--or none at all--has placed one player at a serious disadvantage. In this event, you and your child will want to agree to a new rule that will even up the odds.

But what if, in the midst of a game, your child decides to change the rules to gain an unfair advantage or to get out of a bind or to score more points? Or what if your child wants an alternative rule so badly that he or she assumes it is already established and acts on it? If emotions are running high, it is hardly the time to roll out a lecture on why all players must agree to the rules.

A good solution is to bring out the underlying element of cooperation at the beginning of the game. Instead of asking, "What are the rules of this game?" try "What are we going to agree to do while playing this game?" Let your child know that she or he has some control over the situation. Suggest that just as well-loved folk songs have many different versions, none of which is right or wrong, so do well-loved games. Explain that the game is something agreed upon, and that one of the things you would like to agree upon is whether or not the rules can be changed in the middle of the game. If you begin most games this way, your child will quickly internalize this sense of cooperation.

Be sensitive to the quitting factor. Sometimes, even with the best preparation, parent and child reach an impasse, and one or the other suggests quitting the game. Before insisting on breaking it off (or urging it on to the end), take a long look at the point of the game. If your child is just beginning to learn the rules, playing the game to the bitter end is probably not a high priority. But if your child is having trouble completing things, some sense of closure might be a good idea.

Ihate to admit it, but my response to a quitting request often hinges on how rested and centered I am. My replies have ranged from "If you don't finish this game, it'll be a long time before I play it with you again" to "Let's keep playing and see how things turn out" and from "OK. That's it. I've had it. I'm not playing anymore" to "Why don't we stop this game and go check on the baby birds." When we are involved in the competitive aspect of the game, we are apt to see quitting requests as interruptions; but by focusing on the child's learning, we come to view them as integral to the playing of the game. Depending on our outlook, we can transform the game into an issue of power or an opportunity for learning.

A timid child may need gentle encouragement to take the risk of continuing the game, whereas a child who is too emotionally involved may need a break. The question of when to keep working at a chosen activity and when to turn away from it and take up something else yields an important lesson, one that can be safely explored in the game-playing arena.

Focus on technique. When the emphasis is on learning the rules and developing the necessary skills, children are in competition with themselves. Self-improvement becomes obvious, and with it, a tremendous sense of achievement. One of the best ways to engage in games with very young children is to break down the required skills into small components. This gives the child an opportunity to master beginning an intermediate skills independent of the stress of competition. Just learning the moves of each chess piece can inspire a wonderful feeling of accomplishment!

The day will come, of course, when the skills are more or less in place and your child will want to play a game. At this point, the contextual approach discussed by Shilcock comes into play, and either rule modification or further focus on technique may be appropriate.

Combine the points. To fully eliminate competition from the game, try turning it into a totally cooperative activity. One easy approach is the "highest total score" method. When Christian and I play Ping-Pong now, we try to see how many times we can hit the ball successively. This encourages a genuine interest in how well we are both doing. Although players engaged in this approach may still keep track of how much they contribute compared with how much other players contribute, the exaggerated nature of this concern is alleviated by officially striving for a combined score.

Other games offer some latitude, enabling parents to engineer out even this last remmant of competition. Double solitaire, for example, converts into a very pleasant game when the goal is to have everyone "win." In our familu, we discuss who will benefit most by playing a particular card. The players help each other out, the object is completion, and no one player feels statistically superior or inferior to any other.

Introduce cooperative games. In addition to modifying competitive games, we can introduce our children to cooperative games. A friend told me of a wonderful card game to play with very young children: The parent turns the cards up one at a time, and the child calls out "People!" or "No people!" depending on whether or not a person is depicted on the card. This games creates a rousing sense of excitement and little or no sense of failure.

Cooperative games are now commercially made and readily available. Our family particularly enjoys the Animal Town Games (see For More Information). One of our favorites is Dam Builders, in which all the participants are beavers attempting to build both a dam and a lodge. But the beavers are not the only things on the board; there are also a wolf and the Army Corps of Engineers' bulldozer, which have the potential to disrupt plans at any moment. This game has taught us about beavers and about working together as a "beaver" family to accomplish our goals.

Nowhere does the idea of "letting the child win"--dishonest as it may or may not be--enter into these approaches. In fact, when we begin with the understanding that the parent-child game is different from adult-adult and child-child games, issues surrounding winning and losing become irrelevant. The game itself is subject to evaporation at a moment's notice, leaving only the players.

It is vital to realize what is at stake when you play a game with your child. Game playing does not simply affect your relationship with your child. For as long as the game last, it is your relationship with your child. And after the game ends, it remains a part of your relationship. Time is too precious to be wasted playing against our children when, with some attention, we can learn to play with them.

For More Information

Literature

Deacove, Jim. Games Manual of non-competitive Games. Perth, Ontario: Family Pastimes, 1974.

Deacove, Jim. "Cooperative Games." Mothering, no. 34 (Winter 1985): 43-45.

Kohn, Alfie. No Contest: The Case against Competition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1986.

Orlick, Terry. The Cooperative Sports and Games Book: Challenge without Competition. New York: Pantheon Books, 1978.

Orlick, Terry. The Second Cooperative Sports and Games Book. New York: Pantheon Books, 1982.

Tom Murphy (43), a former college English teacher, is now a labor relations executive and freelance writer. He and his wife Madalene homeschool their three children--Emily (17), Christian (13), and Clare (10)--in Bucks County, Pennsylvania.

COPYRIGHT 1990 Mothering Magazine
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group