Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Adding weight to pieces


  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #121

    MaximRecoil

    andy277 wrote:

    You don’t have reason on your side.

    Yes, I do, which I've already explained.

    You are assuming that the manufacturers changed their weights (which you have no evidence for), which would also mean that by chance I happened to buy only sets that did not have the slotted weights.

    No, I'm not. I said that if your pieces were manufactured by the same company as the broken pawn pieces, then it wouldn't be at all surprising if they changed the method of weighting at some point. For one thing, that's not an assumption, but rather, it is a very plausible possibility, and for another thing, it is predicated on your assumption (for which you have no evidence) that your pieces were manufactured by the same company as the broken pawn pieces. In other words, even if your assumption is correct, it doesn't even remotely preclude your pieces from having a different weighting method than the broken pawn pieces.

    The only assumption I've made is the initial assumption, i.e., that the threaded weight has a method for screwing it in tightly, which is based on reason. You've made two assumptions, neither of which are based on reason, i.e., (1) that your pieces were manufactured by the same company as the broken pawn pieces, and (2) that this automatically means that they are identical in every way.

    I don’t find that a reasonable argument.

    Negated, given that I've just demonstrated that you didn't even understand the argument. See above.

    You haven't proved that the lead was not poured in when molten or that they were screwed in by finger pressure alone (they don’t have to be screwed in tight when there is plenty of thread and a glued baize pad to hold them in place).

    For one, it doesn't look like they were molded in wood, as I mentioned earlier, and two, there are some gaps/voids around the weight that would have been filled by the lead had it been poured in:

    Also, pouring molten lead into a threaded wooden hole would make the fit too tight to ever unscrew, which defeats the purpose of incorporating threads in the first place. In order for threads to work properly, there needs to be sufficient clearance between the male and female threads. Not only would there be extreme friction preventing it from unscrewing, due to the no-clearance fit of lead poured into a hole, but the lead would also flow into every little irregularity in the hole, creating countless little "fingers" holding it in place.

    Screwing it in with finger pressure would mean you could hardly apply any torque once the weight was screwed in too far for you to grip its edges, which would mean it would require hardly any torque to come unscrewed. A glued-on piece of cloth wouldn't hold it back for long. According to Alan Dewey, even the Jaques weights, which definitely did have tool slots for tightening them properly, could work their way out over time. What do you think would happen if the weights weren't even screwed in tightly in the first place?

    And why would anyone rely on finger pressure when it is so easy to add slots for a tool in order to tighten it properly? Lead has such a low melting point that all you need to do is heat the end of your tool with a torch and push it into the weight. Wait a minute for it to cool, and you have your tool slot.

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #122

    ifekali

    Get a room.

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #123

    tubebender

    Many good ideas; I worked as a machinist and I can see that most of the ideas I`ve read are very good. Best of all, if one can purchase them, is simply to buy triple weighted pieces. 

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #124

    tambarskjelve

    Interesting. There is another topic on this forum that drifts into a similar discussion, where one contribution might be helpful here as well. Although the post I’m referring to fails to provide an anal retentive elaboration on the matter, it points out that there seems to be an ideal relationship between the physical and functional properties of the chess piece. The post also suggests that the shape determines the weight if one is to obtain «optimal playability». Lastly it proposes a method of measurement, which might come in handy here:

    Note: The picture conatins a little easter egg for the observant reader (hint: check the small print on the box).

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #125

    netzach

    Nice post :)

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #126

    andy277

    Just to be rid of this discussion, I checked one of my pieces and I could see the start of the screw thread at the base of the weight. Thus, it has a screw thread and it has no tool marks.

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #127

    MaximRecoil

    andy277 wrote:

    Just to be rid of this discussion, I checked one of my pieces and I could see the start of the screw thread at the base of the weight. Thus, it has a screw thread and it has no tool marks.

    Do you have a picture?

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #128

    Benzodiazepine

    TOURNANENT CHESS

    LMAO LMAO!!!

  • 3 weeks ago · Quote · #129

    LuftWaffles

    @tambarskjelve

    A timeless crazychessplaya classic.

  • 40 hours ago · Quote · #130

    SixRavens

    [COMMENT DELETED]

Back to Top

Post your reply: