Does playing chess at high rating levels (2000 plus elo) take the fun out of having a game of chess?

I'm wondering with years of training and playing experience, once you achieve 2000 plus elo rating does the game remain fun? Do the years of training and effort make you jaded? Do you still look forward to having a game of chess with someone equal to your rating or higher?

Or is it a monumental undertaking of time, effort, research, rating protection, etc. Do you play chess against lower rated opponents, or is that a waste of time or avoided for rating protection? Does rating protection strategy exist at higher levels of play? Thanks for replies.

A lot depends on your opponents. I believe, as long as you're facing players who are around your strength, the game should remain enjoyable.

If you're trying to protect your rating, feeling stressed, and avoiding opponents out of fear of Elo loss, then it suggests that you're overrated - and worried about slipping back down to a rating that's more accurate for you.

If you're accurately rated, though, then facing players at your range should feel "comfortable", regardless of what level you're at.

As you progress, the types of "fun" changes.

At lower levels, you enjoy catching people in simple traps.  As you get stronger, those traps do not work and you need to find out ways to outplay people.

Regarding playing lower rated players, it depends.  Online, it doesn't matter at all.  I could drop 500 points today and not care at all.  OTB, is a different matter.  I know many USCF CMs who will not play in events where they will face anyone below 1900 because the risk-reward is not there as they make a push for the NM title.  For example, if you are rated 2000, and play a 900, you only gain 0.8 points for a win, but would lose ~20 points for a loss (or roughly 10 for a draw).  Now, the likelihood of a 900 beating a 2000 is extremely slim; however, there is more to it.  Suppose a 2000 plays another 2000 in round 1 and loses.  Then he faces a 900 in round 2 and wins.  Then faces another 2000 in round 3 and draws.  Despite scoring 50% (his expected score in this scenario), he would lose rating because he would not gain enough rating from the 900 to compensate for the initial loss.  So, when someone is trying to reach a rating-based title, they will often avoid tournaments where this situation can occur as it would slow down their progress.

There's fun chess for people who aren't geniuses and then there's chess for people who are geniuses. I fall into the fun because I'm not a genius. But if you're a genius I'm sure chess is fun and not stressful. Trying to play at a high level if you're not a genius seems to me to be difficult to try to accomplish and not get stressed over it.

Interesting, I didn't know that having never played competitive OTB. Thanks for the detailed explanation.

Along the same lines, I know several NMs who no longer play in smaller club events because they get nothing from them.  For example, suppose you had a 2200 USCF and the next highest rated player was 1900, with almost everyone else being 1200-1600.  The 2200 would be expected to go 5/5 in a 5 round event to gain 1-5 rating points.  If they draw just a single game, they will likely lose a couple points.  In effect, they would be donating rating and giving lower rated players free lessons.  Obviously, this changes if there are multiple people in the 2100-2300 range, but there are only a few clubs in the US that have that situation.