user14328: I want to play chess with my wife, but we have different ranks (I am approximately 1900, and she is ~1500 (probably less based on comments)). Normally, our games are boring for me.
I tried to balance the game by playing without the queen, but I still win the game. I am looking for some tactics to balance the game based on ranking difference?

user3009: Chess doesn't seem to handicap as well as other games.  This is why my wife and I don't play chess together (even though we both play chess).  We play other games instead, where we are much more even (my greater rating in chess comes from years of being coached, not so much from natural ability).
If your wife is interested in learning, you can give her problems from a book, or play through endings (at her level, not yours), but both of these tend to leave the thinking on her end, while you are waiting patiently.  I currently just put a problem up on the demo board in our house for my wife and kids to solve, and field questions about it, and play online if I want a game.

user4418: The way I have always done this is with time.
Start with 5 minutes each on the clocks, no increments. Then the winner gets one minute less and loser one minute more for each subsequent game until equilibrium is reached (players start to alternate wins). If it gets down to 9 v 1 and 9 still wins then the loser gets 9 min 30 seconds and the winner 30 seconds. I've never had it go beyond that.
EDIT: I just got back from the Isle of Man prize giving and after tournament party. IM Lawrence Trent (~2400) was playing blitz / bullet with Caruana with 3 minutes to Caruana's 1 minute and losing in a proportion of about 2 to 1. He then took on Nakamura with 5 minutes to Nakamura's 45 seconds with similar results. So, this is the normal way of handicapping even at the highest levels.

user14309: You can try switching sides every 5 moves or so - a good workout for you too: to try and improve a poor position.

user14354: A solution I have employed with my girlfriend, who is interested in improving at chess, is to begin with the endgame.
Setting up a winning late-game position such as a rook, bishop and three pawns vs a knight and two pawns provides a learning experience for the weaker player on how to leverage existing advantages and close out the game. More pieces can gradually be introduced to dilute the impact of the advantage.
For the stronger player, the goal is surviving as long as possible or attempting to get to a drawn position. 

user70: I don't believe chess really lends itself to such handicapping. She could have a time advantage but it probably wouldn't help since beginners lack ability, not time. More time spent analyzing inefficiently will not substantively help.
I would recommend you switch games, frankly. Shogi, a cousin of chess has a tried-and-true handicapping system. It's a great game, too.
Pieces in Shogi are weaker on the whole, somewhat more numerous, and never really leave the game - they switch sides. Thus a handicap of a piece in Shogi is less severe than a similar handicap in chess, and with more pieces, there is more freedom in the handicapping.
As you can see in these links, this isn't ad hoc. They're serious about both players having a challenging game.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handicap_(shogi)
http://eric.macshogi.com/shogi/handicap/handicap-intro.html
http://users.cms.caltech.edu/~mvanier/hacking/gnushogi/gnushogi_13.html


user13012: For several years I organized an odds-giving tournament for my club during the summer months with a sliding scale from pawn-and-move to queen based on rating difference. For good measure we added a time handicap as well. I do think that if you can beat your wife at Queen odds then the difference in your ratings must be much more than you say.
Equalizing the chances under those conditions, in a way that is fun for both of you, calls for extreme measures. Have you tried giving her the right to retract her move a certain number of times in each game?

user14340: In addition to other suggestions, you could consider a chess variant that may even the playing field.
Chess960 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess960) [previously called Fischer Random, but renamed to avoid potential conflict/discussion over Bobby Fischer who invented it], for example is a variant that randomizes the positioning of the back-rank pieces. Unlike other randomization variants, this one strongly attempts to keep everything else about the game the same. The rules of piece placement are:
-The two sides are mirrored, as in regular chess.
-The king must be between the two rooks [this allows for castleing, which involves moving the king to the 'traditional' kingside or queenside castleing positions].
-The two bishops must be on opposite colours.
This leaves 960 possible positions, which can be chosen at random through various means (check the wikepedia page for details).
The benefit of chess960 in this case, is that it eliminates some of the advantage inherent in opening position theory.
By the midgame, a typical Chess960 game looks like a regular chess game (except perhaps for some oddly placed pieces here or there). Ultimately it opens up like a regular chess game, but you can't memorize any opening lines. For a 1500-1900 match-up, opening theory likely makes a significant edge between the two of you. Of course, there is some small learning curve to starting to play chess960, but as you are both learning it for the first time, you will both have that curve together. Of course, a skill difference would still exist, so even with Chess960 it may be required to still give your wife a rook/ minor piece for the full handicap.
A particular copyrighted variant that creates an even greater randomization aspect, is "Knightmare Chess" http://www.sjgames.com/knightmare/. This game introduces cards with various impacts on the game ("This turn your pawn can move twice, etc."). The random element decreases the net impact of a skill differential somewhat, as luck plays a fairly large element.

user14329: (Disclaimer: this is my first post on this network, and in all honesty both you and your wife could probably beat me at a game. But I do have years of experience of finding handicaps to make chess games more even and enjoyable.)

Time advantage: this probably depends on your situation. Some people are great at untimed and terrible at rapid, but tinkering about with time differences until you find a healthy compromise has the positive of being very flexible as it can be fine-tuned very precisely. I find the pressure is greatest on the stronger player when you use a time per move system rather than a time per game - and the weaker player can play untimed.
Further piece advantages: I've never needed to go much beyond a queen handicap, but I imagine two rooks or a queen and minor piece would be the next step.
Blindfold chess: you could try playing without being able to look at the board (while your wife can), if you've ever done blindfold chess before or feel you have enough experience/memory to try. A somewhat easier version might be to only allow you to look at the board while it's your turn, which only makes sense if you're using time controls.
Help her to improve: it may be that the two of you playing against each other doesn't make sense with such a large difference in skill. How about you play practice matches where you offer her tips and guidance, allow her to undo any blunders and teach her until she is at a similar skill level?


14328: <p>I want to play chess with my wife, but we have different ranks (I am approximately 1900, and she is ~1500 (probably less based on comments)). Normally, our games are boring for me.</p>
<p>I tried to balance the game by playing without the queen, but I still win the game. I am looking for some tactics to balance the game based on ranking difference?</p>
 3009: <p>Chess doesn't seem to handicap as well as other games.  This is why my wife and I don't play chess together (even though we both play chess).  We play other games instead, where we are much more even (my greater rating in chess comes from years of being coached, not so much from natural ability).</p>

<p>If your wife is interested in learning, you can give her problems from a book, or play through endings (at her level, not yours), but both of these tend to leave the thinking on her end, while you are waiting patiently.  I currently just put a problem up on the demo board in our house for my wife and kids to solve, and field questions about it, and play online if I want a game.</p>
 4418: <p>The way I have always done this is with time.</p>

<p>Start with 5 minutes each on the clocks, no increments. Then the winner gets one minute less and loser one minute more for each subsequent game until equilibrium is reached (players start to alternate wins). If it gets down to 9 v 1 and 9 still wins then the loser gets 9 min 30 seconds and the winner 30 seconds. I've never had it go beyond that.</p>

<p>EDIT: I just got back from the Isle of Man prize giving and after tournament party. IM Lawrence Trent (~2400) was playing blitz / bullet with Caruana with 3 minutes to Caruana's 1 minute and losing in a proportion of about 2 to 1. He then took on Nakamura with 5 minutes to Nakamura's 45 seconds with similar results. So, this is the normal way of handicapping even at the highest levels.</p>
 14309: <p>You can try switching sides every 5 moves or so - a good workout for you too: to try and improve a poor position.</p>
 14354: <p>A solution I have employed with my girlfriend, who is interested in improving at chess, is to begin with the endgame.</p>

<p>Setting up a winning late-game position such as a rook, bishop and three pawns vs a knight and two pawns provides a learning experience for the weaker player on how to leverage existing advantages and close out the game. More pieces can gradually be introduced to dilute the impact of the advantage.</p>

<p>For the stronger player, the goal is surviving as long as possible or attempting to get to a drawn position. </p>
 70: <p>I don't believe chess really lends itself to such handicapping. She could have a time advantage but it probably wouldn't help since beginners lack ability, not time. More time spent analyzing inefficiently will not substantively help.</p>

<p>I would recommend you switch games, frankly. Shogi, a cousin of chess has a tried-and-true handicapping system. It's a great game, too.</p>

<p>Pieces in Shogi are weaker on the whole, somewhat more numerous, and never really leave the game - they switch sides. Thus a handicap of a piece in Shogi is less severe than a similar handicap in chess, and with more pieces, there is more freedom in the handicapping.</p>

<p>As you can see in these links, this isn't ad hoc. They're serious about both players having a challenging game.</p>

<ul>
<li><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handicap_(shogi)" rel="noreferrer">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handicap_(shogi)</a></li>
<li><a href="http://eric.macshogi.com/shogi/handicap/handicap-intro.html" rel="noreferrer">http://eric.macshogi.com/shogi/handicap/handicap-intro.html</a></li>
<li><a href="http://users.cms.caltech.edu/~mvanier/hacking/gnushogi/gnushogi_13.html" rel="noreferrer">http://users.cms.caltech.edu/~mvanier/hacking/gnushogi/gnushogi_13.html</a></li>
</ul>
 13012: <p>For several years I organized an odds-giving tournament for my club during the summer months with a sliding scale from pawn-and-move to queen based on rating difference. For good measure we added a time handicap as well. I do think that if you can beat your wife at Queen odds then the difference in your ratings must be much more than you say.</p>
<p>Equalizing the chances under those conditions, in a way that is fun for both of you, calls for extreme measures. Have you tried giving her the right to retract her move a certain number of times in each game?</p>
 14340: <p><strong>In addition to other suggestions, you could consider a chess variant that may even the playing field.</strong></p>
<p><strong>Chess960</strong> (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess960" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess960</a>) [previously called Fischer Random, but renamed to avoid potential conflict/discussion over Bobby Fischer who invented it], for example is a variant that randomizes the positioning of the back-rank pieces. Unlike other randomization variants, this one strongly attempts to keep everything else about the game the same. The rules of piece placement are:</p>
<p>-The two sides are mirrored, as in regular chess.</p>
<p>-The king must be between the two rooks [this allows for castleing, which involves moving the king to the 'traditional' kingside or queenside castleing positions].</p>
<p>-The two bishops must be on opposite colours.</p>
<p>This leaves 960 possible positions, which can be chosen at random through various means (check the wikepedia page for details).</p>
<p><strong>The benefit of chess960 in this case, is that it eliminates <em>some</em> of the advantage inherent in opening position theory.</strong></p>
<p>By the midgame, a typical Chess960 game looks like a regular chess game (except perhaps for some oddly placed pieces here or there). Ultimately it opens up like a regular chess game, but you can't memorize any opening lines. For a 1500-1900 match-up, opening theory likely makes a significant edge between the two of you. Of course, there is some small learning curve to starting to play chess960, but as you are both learning it for the first time, you will both have that curve together. Of course, a skill difference would still exist, so even with Chess960 it may be required to still give your wife a rook/ minor piece for the full handicap.</p>
<p><strong>A particular copyrighted variant that creates an even greater randomization aspect, is &quot;Knightmare Chess&quot; <a href="http://www.sjgames.com/knightmare/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.sjgames.com/knightmare/</a></strong>. This game introduces cards with various impacts on the game (&quot;This turn your pawn can move twice, etc.&quot;). The random element decreases the net impact of a skill differential somewhat, as luck plays a fairly large element.</p>
 14329: <p>(Disclaimer: this is my first post on this network, and in all honesty both you and your wife could probably beat me at a game. But I do have years of experience of finding handicaps to make chess games more even and enjoyable.)</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Time advantage</strong>: this probably depends on your situation. Some people are great at untimed and terrible at rapid, but tinkering about with time differences until you find a healthy compromise has the positive of being very flexible as it can be fine-tuned very precisely. I find the pressure is greatest on the stronger player when you use a time per move system rather than a time per game - and the weaker player can play untimed.</li>
<li><strong>Further piece advantages</strong>: I've never needed to go much beyond a queen handicap, but I imagine two rooks or a queen and minor piece would be the next step.</li>
<li><strong>Blindfold chess</strong>: you could try playing without being able to look at the board (while your wife can), if you've ever done blindfold chess before or feel you have enough experience/memory to try. A somewhat easier version might be to only allow you to look at the board while it's your turn, which only makes sense if you're using time controls.</li>
<li><strong>Help her to improve</strong>: it may be that the two of you playing against each other doesn't make sense with such a large difference in skill. How about you play practice matches where you offer her tips and guidance, allow her to undo any blunders and teach her until she is at a similar skill level?</li>
</ul>
