Hi - I wouldn't dream of using these pieces in a tourney. FAR TOO RARE
Well...I suppose this is obvious but there are other occasions to play chess than in tournaments. I think it would be a shame to never play a single game with them. Even the earliest known 4.4" Jaques Staunton Chessmen, the "old no. 8" owned by Alan Fersht marched into battle one more time in the 21st century.
You should have presented a short bio of Sir Alan Fersht. I didn't know about the man or his accomplishments, and I imagine most chess players don't. Here is the entry on him at Wikipedia.
Yes a GREAT Bio that. One wonders how he even had time for chess.
The first pic above shows the 6" set(that needs a 3" board) and a 4.4" set that is so girthy it requires a 2.75" board. However the bases of both sets are almost exactly the same width.
IN this 2nd pic above, a 3rd set has been added. This 3rd set works like a charm on a 2.5 " board. But notice, the ball on the pawns gets larger as the sets require smaller squares(also notice their base tapers). The 6" set's rook has the smallest diameters(but is much taller). The bishop's tops also get fatter just like the pawns did.
This pic really shows what makes the 6" set require so much space(a 3" board really is ridiculously large). Look at the knight on the rights girth/width. He looks like a sheet of plywood. This mixed with his height and the height of the whole set fully trump the .078% rule. 







Hi - I wouldn't dream of using these pieces in a tourney. FAR TOO RARE
Well...I suppose this is obvious but there are other occasions to play chess than in tournaments. I think it would be a shame to never play a single game with them. Even the earliest known 4.4" Jaques Staunton Chessmen, the "old no. 8" owned by Alan Fersht marched into battle one more time in the 21st century.
You should have presented a short bio of Sir Alan Fersht. I didn't know about the man or his accomplishments, and I imagine most chess players don't. Here is the entry on him at Wikipedia.