[NT] NTs: how often do you let someone else win?

[InsatiableCuriosity]

If I am talking about life/work/etc, I am the least competitive person I know - at least in traditional terms of competitiveness.

I enjoy blazing new trails and being an early adopter f technology BUT, to achieve a given end that will ultimately be to everyone's benefit, and it means that we will have a win/win situation, I will seed ideas and set things up so others feel that they have won with their own idea. I DON'T CONSIDER THAT LOSING but those I set up to win feel that it is and it makes them happy so who am I to rain on their parade so long as the given end is achieved.

I am very patient and will patiently unravel the knots over years but would rather be influential than to win per se.

 

[JustHer]

Let's just say, I never "let" others win but if they truly do win by their own argument then I won't pretend like they didn't.

 

[Totenkindly]

I had more of an issue with it when younger. I always played to win and I would even get very frustrated when people would do "stupid" things during a game, luck out, and win over my thought-out strategies (e.g., in Risk, where someone would do a completely stupid move that was obviously going to destroy them... and end up taking me out with them). This changed over time because it became less and less important for people to "know how smart I was" as some sort of egobooster, and losing a game wasn't that detrimental a thing anymore. It was just a game.

With my eldest child, I would play him hard. Checkers, chinese checkers, chess, whatever, Stratego. Even when he was 4-5 years old I never really "threw" a game just to make him feel better. I sometimes felt bad for that because everyone else would always "let their child win" but my thinking was that, if and when he won, it would be a real victory and one he could be proud of. It was definitely an "NT honesty" thing -- I wanted his victory to be real, not contrived.

But the more that I raised my children, the more my values there changed because I began to see that at their age it was more demoralizing to never win anything, and what I needed to do was present them with just enough challenge to push them, rather than making the mark so high that there was no way they could reach it -- and allow them enough victories to encourage them to keep trying and feeling like they were making progress. That approach seemed to be more effective.

Of course, later, I didn't have to worry about "throwing games," the older my kids got. In fact, by the time my eldest was 10-12, I did usually still win but I would have to pull victories out of the air... I can't remember how many times I thought I was going to lose, and then he would just make one mistake and I'd end up winning anyway. It made the games very fun, and I liked the thought that my kids had become competent enough to be able to seriously challenge and potentially beat me regardless of the age difference.

 

[Such Irony]

I don't tend to purposely let other people win, it's more a matter of if my attention diminishes I won't care about winning myself, and sometimes I'll want the competition to just be over.

This.

I rarely let others win and I think some of it is because I don't like being let win myself. I want to know I won because of my competence not because someone just wants to make me feel good. As a kid when playing a game, my parents would sometimes let me win because they thought I'd be a bad sport if I didn't. I hated that.

 

[Froody Blue Gem]

In a lot of games, I'm willing to let other people win. It's more the experience of playing the game, if it's fun and enjoyable, and if there is an element of creativity to the game. When everyone just cares about winning, it ruins a potentially fun game. There is friendly competitiveness but I dislike it when it goes too far at the expense of putting others down.

I try to avoid arguments altogether, and I let the other person win because I don't want to put our rapport in jeopardy. But sometimes, I inwardly know that I'm right about something, and don't let go of that. Then I'll go over things I could have said and whatifs in my head, that I didn't want to say in the moment. And I imagine what the other person would say in response, or possible things that they might say in those situations.

When it comes to stuff I'm knowledgeable about, and I know the other person is wrong there have been times when I refuse to lose. I do try to see the points the other person has though, and not be narrow-minded about it. Sometimes people are wrong but they just keep on going on as if they know that they are right. If our rapport is put on the line, I won't say anything about the other person being wrong or I'll let the person win. There are people out there who are just too stubborn to convince.

I can be a bit, competitive when I'm good at a game and familiar with it. More inwardly competitive, and not in an overt or braggadocios way. But keeping a certain strategy in the back of my mind, and not telling the other players of the game. If someone else is new to the game, I don't want to be hard on them, so I'll let them win.

 

[Morpeko]

If I am decent or better at a game or activity, I NEED to win. I don't care about the people I'm playing against, whether they're new or an expert at it. I'm very competitive in that way, and quite a sore loser. I've been this way since childhood. I'd rather just not play if there's a chance of me losing.

If I happen to lose a game I perceive myself to have some skill in, I'll be a miserable loser. I usually forget to congratulate people who actually win, and just wallow in my own misery from losing. It's not pleasant.

If I am bad at a game, then I won't try very hard. I don't want to bruise my already vulnerable ego by putting effort and losing.

When it comes to arguments, I will never let another person win, but I know how to argue in a calm and rational manner (most of the time). I don't ever want to be perceived to lose an argument due to me being over-emotional or illogical. However, I often realize that others are stubborn even when they're wrong, and as long as I tell my side of the story in a well-worded way that makes sense, I'll end the debate by saying "to each his own" or something like that.

 

[Stigmata]

Almost never it is a game I'm invested in or skilled at. I don't mind losing to some equally or greater skilled, though, and crave that challenge. Most of my competitiveness is inwardly motivated as opposed to necessarily caring about being better than others (i.e. wanting to achieve my own set goals as opposed to adhering to more objective measurements).

 

[Maou]

Depends on skill level of the other person. If I know someone is bad at a game, I will go easy on them and handicap myself. For example, I had a lot of my coworkers get into Yugioh for a period of time. I would use "pet decks" instead of the meta decks. Which are decks that are really not that great, but fun to play. Then when they improved, I would use more and more challenging decks for them to fight against. Eventually they got good enough that I could go all out and use my real deck. It was quite fun. I think I enjoy it more if everyone is having fun, rather than just winning constantly. I love being competative as well, but its rare for me to be on the same skill level as others. Im usually the one thats really bad or really good at certain games.

 

[Coriolis]

I never let someone else win, but if I am playing with someone new to a game, or perhaps a kid, I might give them pointers as we go to help them play better.