Only the second is natural.

Thanks.
So the structure of first one is correct too?
What if "for" is omitted and use gerund alone?

So the structure of first one is correct too?-- No, I cannot say that it is; some theoretical grammatical structures are just not used.

What if "for" is omitted and use gerund alone?- That doesn't quite make grammatical sense either, though it could be a casual utterance, I suppose (note the comma): You don't need to dress up, just going to the pub.

Thanks.
But one problem! You are a experienced teacher. A lot of ESL students, including me, are mixing up usages of "to" and "

youzou I preferred "to" in this case, but I don't know the reason

I suppose it has to do with your native language; other students do the same. Avoid the impulse.

youzouOne way is practice, but can you suggest any book or website to practice? Or a good lesson to understand the difference?

I've never seen a website practicing

Thanks.
Could you please check these two, too?

I am experienced enough to carry out the project.
I am exper

Please check my understandings:

I guess when we are talking about an individual purpose of an action or event we use "to", and when we are talking about purpose of a thing or an object we should use "for + gerund".

The knife is for cutting. OK
The knife is to cut. X

They are professionals for looking after babies. (I think it is OK

I am experienced enough to carry out the project.-- Yes.
I am experienced enough for carrying out the project.-- No.

I guess when we are talking about an individual purpose of an action or event we use "to", and when we are talking about purpose of a thing or an object we should use "for + gerund".- Sorry, but that does not spring to mind. You co

Well, I am disappointed.