I don't think it's ever good to throw a board game. Maybe it's just my competitive spirit talking, but I play to win! I don't play to make other people feel better. If I was a guest and I knew the host was purposefully throwing the game, I'd feel disappointed and, honestly, a bit insulted that he or she felt they needed to.

If you're really worried about winning all the time, try to mix the games up with ones that you like but may not be the best at. Maybe there's someone at your party who's amazing at them, and it'll even out.

Don't throw the game. I think your friends may appreciate the challenge and learn from your techniques.

Absolutely not. They'll never get better, or catch on to your strategy, if you aren't truly attempting to make the best decisions that you can. Also, a lot of these games have an element of luck to them, so if you make bad choices when you know to make good ones and then luck turns against you too, you're going to get clobbered. Instead, recommend tips to your friends every so often, or stop one if they're about to make a really bad judgment call.

I think you should alter the games between the ones you're good and and ones you stink at. That should be enough to keep your guests happy that they're winning a few. I'd like to say if they're mature adults that they won't care if they win or lose. But let's face it: we all like to win!

P.S. If and when your guests are your grandchildren, let them win all the time :)

Well, what I've always done in situations like that is use handicaps.

For example, with my favorite game, Go, which is played by adding stones to a board in order to take over territory, when me and my friends get together to play, everybody knows I'm better at it, so they get a few extra stones on the board at start of game in order to have some territorial advantage.

If it was chess, and we all knew that one of us was way better, then that person would forfeit a pawn or two in advance.

If it was monopoly, the lesser players would be started with more money, or with a property or three. If it was Risk, then the weaker player would get some territorial advantage, like a full continent or a few extra countries and/or soldiers, etc.

Most every board game can be handicapped one way or another, if you think about it.

If the object of the game is to gain or acquire something, then start the weaker player with some of the acquisition, and if the object of the game is to wipe out or eliminate things, then start the better player with less of the stuff to loose.

In the case of something like scrabble, you might have to get even more creative, like... hmm... like... make it so that the vowels and consonants are face down but in different boxes, and make it so the better speller can't draw vowels, such the he *has* to weave his words into words already placed by others, or make it so the high score letters like q and z cannot be drawn by the best speller, or something like that... use your imagination... you might even end up inventing a popular new variation on the standard game.

(That happened when I had a board game called Blitzkrieg and I was always winning such that nobody wanted to play even though I loved it. We did some brainstorming and made what seemed life a few simple changes to the rules, but it actually had the effect of turning it into a whole different game, and everyone liked it a lot more, including me when the focus of the time was more to have a game to socialize around than to quietly sit in a circle rubbing our chins while analyzing a complex board pattern.)

The point is, nobody has to pretend that anybody is a better or worse player than they really are. People know the score... they'll *know* if you've got a rep for being good at something... so it's demeaning to try and pretend not.

The goal is to have fun, and if you're a much superior player, then everyone will relax and respect your gamesmanship and probably give you a toast if you declare a voluntary handicap.

Everyone will have just as much fun watching you squirm your way around a handicapped position as they would if all players were equal, and *you'll* have a better time, because you'll have to actually think!

LOL, I don't usually answer with such short answers, but this time, it's simple. Heck no! I am far too competitive to throw a game for the sake of nicety! My friends are smart; let 'em beat me fair and square!

That's a trickier question than it looks at first sight! It depends on many things, like you and your friends' personalities, the reasons why you all play, and just how big an advantage you have.

For example, are you a person that could lose games and not turn grumpy about losing? Are your friends happy to play games that they seldom win, and enjoy the challenge of taking on a good player? Or do you all need a pretty level contest for it to be fun in the first place? Will people feel disatisfied if they win, but they feel you didn't give them your best game?

Some games you can not so much throw them, as just not give it your all, and that'll be enough to keep it competitive and enjoyable for everyone.

But other games, your advantage is so big, that even with you making only a minimal effort, it'll be darn near impossible for anyone that's not a serious player to beat you. It'll be no fun for them to get beat every time with no clue about why they're losing, and it'll be no fun for you to win every time without it ever being remotely challenging.

So I think any of the options could be a good chouce depending on the people and the game. Some games, it's best to give a miss except against other strong players, others you could maybe ease up a little so people have a chance to beat you, and maybe best of all is to find games that everyone enjoys and can play on a reasonably level footing.

Personally at the moment I don't have these dilemmas, as I don't have these kind of sessions with adults. My equivalent nowadays is with my little nieces and nephew, even if other family members might be involved too. And there the answer for sure is to try just hard enough that it's fun all round, neither making it so easy for them that it's no challenge, or so hard that it's pure frustration.

If it was some sort of other social gathering and you suggested "hey everyone lets play Trivial Pursuit" then it would be bad form for you to use the deck where you know the answers and thrash your guests..

However that isn't the situation here. Everyone has come expecting a board games with the understanding that they will be played competitively

Now, due to the combination of experience with the games and your own high levels of awesomeness there will be ones that you're likely to be very good at. If these are the only ones that are played it could get rather dull rather quickly unless some of the other players are equally awesome.

To level the playing field, get some of your guests to bring in their favorite games so they have a degree of advantage. Alternatively if this is a regular thing get your games shop to suggest some new games that you haven't played yet and introduce them as well..

Sounds like a lot of fun though....