Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Which Dubrovnik Set do you like betterChessBazaar or House of Staunton?


  • 4 months ago · Quote · #61

    PolarChess

    FrankHelwig wrote:

    You may want to credit the chess museum when you are using their pics...

    http://www.chess-museum.com/staunton-style.html

    Also, I am sceptical of any claims made by HoS. They have a long track record of making stuff up. As for their Dubrovnik replica set, it is pretty close, and I'm sure there were variances of the 1970 sets floating around, so who can tell for sure what the definitive design of the set is supposed to look like. From what I can tell, HoS at a minimum changed the knight a little, and increased the overall size of the set to 3.75".

    You get angry about no credit for an image nobody cares about and then you defame HOS, an honourable company, without one example?  Shame on you!

    To the best of my knowledge the original 1970 Dubrovnik had a 3.75-inch King.  I agree the knight has been changed; it has been improved without drastic measures.  The rest of the pieces appear to be the same as an original chess set made in Zagreb.

    Cordially,

    PC

  • 4 months ago · Quote · #62

    9kick9

    Polarchess.. Frank is a supporter of HOS. If you read his many posts about HOS he has only good things to say about them. The HOS Dubrovnik is a nice set without a doubt. The Queen's Coronet has been changed from the original which you can see on the NOJ chess site. Its still a close copy of a nice looking set but, in No Way an Exact Copy.!

  • 4 months ago · Quote · #63

    FrankHelwig

    PolarChess wrote: You get angry about no credit for an image nobody cares about and then you defame HOS, an honourable company, without one example?  Shame on you!

    I wasn't angry, and didn't mean to come across that way. Merely pointing out that it's good manners to credit someone when using their picture (something I haven't always done myself).

    As for HoS - I like them and buy from them frequently. Doesn't mean I have to buy their Marketing claims. To show that I'm not actually "defaming" them, here's 3 examples:

    - they claim the 1970 Dubrovnik was redesigned for the chess olympiad in Siegen/Germany. As others have posted in threads here (including photographic evidence), a German design was used in Siegen, not a Dubrovnik

    - they claim a fictitious provenance for the "Zagreb" set, which has no basis in fact. The set used in 59 in Zagreb was a Portoroz set (to the best of my knowledge). The HoS Zagreb is just a made-up design

    - The were selling a set under the "New York Series" name, which they were previously selling as a BCC replica under the name "BCC London Series", claiming it was a replica of a BCC set from the 1920s. In fact, BCC stopped producing sets around the turn of the century, and the HoS set was modeled after an Ayres set

  • 4 months ago · Quote · #64

    9kick9

    Points well made Frank.! The HOS Dubrovnik is a very nice set & I almost ordered one myself. Compared to the NOJ version which is out of my price range. Then I read goodnightmike's thread about the Chess Bazaar version & pulled the trigger. The price including free shipping was too good to pass up. The Dubrovnik version is evey bit as high quality as another set I bought from HOS. The craftsmanship on both is superb.!

  • 4 months ago · Quote · #65

    PolarChess

    FrankHelwig wrote:
    PolarChess wrote: You get angry about no credit for an image nobody cares about and then you defame HOS, an honourable company, without one example?  Shame on you!

    I wasn't angry, and didn't mean to come across that way. Merely pointing out that it's good manners to credit someone when using their picture (something I haven't always done myself).

    As for HoS - I like them and buy from them frequently. Doesn't mean I have to buy their Marketing claims. To show that I'm not actually "defaming" them, here's 3 examples:

    - they claim the 1970 Dubrovnik was redesigned for the chess olympiad in Siegen/Germany. As others have posted in threads here (including photographic evidence), a German design was used in Siegen, not a Dubrovnik

    - they claim a fictitious provenance for the "Zagreb" set, which has no basis in fact. The set used in 59 in Zagreb was a Portoroz set (to the best of my knowledge). The HoS Zagreb is just a made-up design

    - The were selling a set under the "New York Series" name, which they were previously selling as a BCC replica under the name "BCC London Series", claiming it was a replica of a BCC set from the 1920s. In fact, BCC stopped producing sets around the turn of the century, and the HoS set was modeled after an Ayres set

    Hi Frank, no hard feelings, thanks.  I do agree that HOS can be a bit aggressive with their marketing; however, before HOS showed up the quality of chessmen available to the public had diminished to the point that most sets were junk.  HOS turned it around and the other manufacturers had to increase the quality of their chessmen.

    Cordially,

    PC

  • 4 months ago · Quote · #66

    9kick9

    Thats a good point polarchess.! It seems HOS got everyone upping the quality of their sets. They do offer some nice sets including the Dubrovnik set. All the finer sets are mostly made by 2-3 manufacturers in India. Even Jaques of London are now made in India.

  • 4 months ago · Quote · #67

    FrankHelwig

    That is true polar chess, HoS revived the market for quality chess sets in North America, and we are all better off for it...

  • 3 months ago · Quote · #68

    informaticacobach29

    I haven´t bought the CB Dubrovnik yet, but today a friend brought me a Noj Dubrovnik and a HoS Dubrovnik that he bought for me on eBay.

    The HoS is a great set, but the Noj is simply amazing (I don´t know why, but it came with 5 queens).I must confess that perhaps I did not pay attention properly to the HoS, having received both sets at the same time.

    I will wait for the 4" CB.

    I share some pictures I took.

  • 3 months ago · Quote · #69

    goodknightmike

    Very nice indeed!! Welcome to Dubrovomania. You are defintely a menber!!

    What's the sqaure size of your board? Pieces look good on these squares.

  • 3 months ago · Quote · #70

    FBeyer

    Is that one of Ifekali's magnetic boards?

    That date stamp is throwing me off, I can't NOT stare at it...

    Also: a friend bought you a Noj set? Really? If he/she has a ton of cash to spare I'll happily forward my adress...

  • 3 months ago · Quote · #71

    9kick9

    Nice NOJ set & board. Thanks for the pics.!

  • 3 months ago · Quote · #72

    informaticacobach29

    The board is one of those made by Ifekali, its name is Beatrice Smile and the squares are about 2.2" (56 mm).

    Usually, when I want to buy a chess set on eBay or HoS, I transfer the money to a friend who lives in the US and he buys it for me. Many of the sellers on eBay (like the one who was selling the NOJ) ship only within the US.

    Also, sorry for the date stamp on the pictures.

  • 3 months ago · Quote · #73

    ARenko

    [COMMENT DELETED]
  • 8 weeks ago · Quote · #74

    Eyechess

    I own the Noj Dubrovnik set, which looks to now be their Dubrovnik "2" design.  It is my favorite Chess Set without a doubt.  It appears they are making the first set design which is a little different.  I also bought this set before they raised the price and paid well under $500 for it. 

    I also have purchased and either currently own or used to own over 18 HOS wooden sets.  So, I am not an anti-HOS person by any means.

    It is an objective fact that the HOS designs are not very true to the models they often claim to recreate.  The Reykjavik set is a typica example.  If you ever would look at pictures of the original design you woud see how far off the HOS offerings are (they had the Reykjavik and then the Reykjavik 2).

    The Dubrovnik set of theirs is also not a true replica.  I can tell by the pictures on this thread as well as at their site that the pieces are not proportioned well.  I also think the crenelations on the Queens are too narrow.  I do like the carving of the knights better on the HOS set than the CB one.

    I don't like the ebonized option as the only one for the dark pieces.  My Noj set is European Walnut and it is a very sturdy wood.  For the much lower cost, I like the Sheesham of CB.

    How are the pieces balanced on the CB set?  I would consider picking one of these up for blitz play.

    Of course I have a HOS Liberty Series set in Rosewood for my normal blitz.  I used to talk with Frank Camaratta back in the late 90's and early 2000's when he was getting the sets made.  The Liberty Series Set is a direct copy of the Pinney set from the 1930's.  Frank would tell me how these sets seemed to be made of iron and would take a beating and never look worse for wear.  He was certainly right about that.  My LIberty Series set was one of the first 2 Frank had made in Rosewood and it still looks great after all these years of blitz and pieces falling to the floor and concrete.

    Anyway, I like the CB version and am going to look to pick one up, probably as a Christmas present from my wife, which she doesn't realize yet :)

  • 5 weeks ago · Quote · #75

    deafdrummer

    I most likely would take the CB version because they have a heavier look, and the top to collars on the pieces are both thicker and protrude less from the main shaft of the pieces (less likely to chip or break off), and I like the CB queen better because it has a more interesting corona.  I'm not too crazy about the knight on either set, but would clearly take the CB knight because of its more rounded bottom of the carved part just above the base.  I just don't understand why they made the smaller set in 3.6" instead of at least 3.75", which rules it out of tournaments.

  • 5 weeks ago · Quote · #76

    goodknightmike

    deafdrummer wrote:

    I most likely would take the CB version because they have a heavier look, and the top to collars on the pieces are both thicker and protrude less from the main shaft of the pieces (less likely to chip or break off), and I like the CB queen better because it has a more interesting corona.  I'm not too crazy about the knight on either set, but would clearly take the CB knight because of its more rounded bottom of the carved part just above the base.  I just don't understand why they made the smaller set in 3.6" instead of at least 3.75", which rules it out of tournaments.

    Sets with 3.6" Kings are  quite acceptiple in US tournaments If both players agree to use the set.

  • 5 weeks ago · Quote · #77

    Fresh_from_the_Oven

    3.6" ought to be totally compliant, so if black said we use a 3.6" set, it gets used (unless otherwise non-standard).

    I guess the lack of a king's cross makes the dubrov's non-standard?


Back to Top

Post your reply: