Dubrovnik 1970 Repro for Sale

checkmateohwait

I've made sets and can assure you all that this is not easy task. All 32 pieces had to be perfect for you? Man, you guys......... Wow.

TundraMike

SC made it in plain boxwood not antiqued when I suggested it to him. He stained and sealed properly the dark pieces to resemble dark walnut.  

Why do a couple of the manufacturers do not know how to seal a piece without putting lacquer on it?  Tha's like a weak excuse saying if you do not want the piece to bleed then pay $20 or $30 extra to seal it with lacquer. NOJ has no problem sealing and sanding and repeating the steps over and over to make a superior product without all that lacquer shinning on the pieces. But it takes labor and also takes the UNDERSTANDING of how to prepare the wood for stain.  My crimson pieces (checked on them 2 weeks ago) still bleed red on my fingers if they are the slightest bit damp (water bottle sweating etc.) never mind trying to wax the piece. Instead of trying to sell it and not letting the buyer know I think I will use it kindling one day. Now I paid $200 for this set and it was a POS and custom made so no money back or exchange for anything else. That is why buy quality and you will not regret it. Yes, you might have to save up but in the long run, you will be happier with quality. 

Now about the original topic, I do like the way his set is coming along, he is listening and each set just might be better than the last.  Once he perfects it, it will be worth every penny he is asking. Remember the Dubrovnik pieces should not be weighted heavily. Heavily weighted is not synonymous with quality. .

Haverumwilltravel
checkmateohwait wrote:

I've made sets and can assure you all that this is not easy task. All 32 pieces had to be perfect for you? Man, you guys......... Wow.

Oh I am a well aware of what it takes to turn and carve a set.  You get what you pay for. They don't have to be perfect, just close. happy.png

checkmateohwait

Agreed.

checkmateohwait

I have done clay sets as well. The clay always works against you, cracking, getting too dry, god forbid you drop one............

Eyechess

To be analytically critical, the Mandeep set has nice Knights, but the Kings, Queens and Pawns look too much like the Staunton style and not the Dubrovnik.

The set shown in this topic looks pretty good in design.  If I were to buy it there are a few things I would like to see.  I would like the White pieces to be a lighter colored beige than what is pictured.  As that set ages those White pieces will get pretty dark.

I would also like to see the pieces be more consistent one to the other in shape, size and detail.

And of course he needs to do better on the finish work.  He needs to get the glue cleaned off the pieces, the staining consistent and so forth and so on.

After all this is fixed, I would say the set would be worth the $250 he is asking.

 

 

Haverumwilltravel

Lets see side by side pic of Noj and Mandeeps. Eye.

Eyechess
Haverumwilltravel wrote:

Lets see side by side pic of Noj and Mandeeps. Eye.

 

Well, I did live in Missouri for a couple of years.  So, show me happy.png

Seriously, there are a few designs from Noj that I do not personally want or care for.

For instance, I do not like that Tal 1960 set.  And I don't care who makes it.

I also do not personally like the original Dubrovnik 1950 style, and once again I don't care who makes it.  I do remember when that Mandeep set was first reviewed on this forum, I looked at pictures of that set and then I looked at the Noj pictures from their site.  It was another that claimed the Mandeep pieces looked too Staunton-like.  I certainly agree when looking at the pictures.

But understand, I will not be buying any version of the original 1950 set from any maker.  Of course, if someone would like to send me a free set I would be happy to review it.  Yes, I would take a free set from Noj, Mandeep, this guy, and even,...you happy.png

Haverumwilltravel

Nite all.

forked_again
Eyechess wrote:
Haverumwilltravel wrote:

Lets see side by side pic of Noj and Mandeeps. Eye.

 

Well, I did live in Missouri for a couple of years.  So, show me

Seriously, there are a few designs from Noj that I do not personally want or care for.

For instance, I do not like that Tal 1960 set.  And I don't care who makes it.

I also do not personally like the original Dubrovnik 1950 style, and once again I don't care who makes it.  I do remember when that Mandeep set was first reviewed on this forum, I looked at pictures of that set and then I looked at the Noj pictures from their site.  It was another that claimed the Mandeep pieces looked too Staunton-like.  I certainly agree when looking at the pictures.

But understand, I will not be buying any version of the original 1950 set from any maker.  Of course, if someone would like to send me a free set I would be happy to review it.  Yes, I would take a free set from Noj, Mandeep, this guy, and even,...you

This business about the SC pieces looking too much like Staunton has been argued here before (originally started by a troll), and I completely disagree.  

First, it is important to note that the SC Dubrovnik is a repro of the 1950 original, and the set in this thread is of the 70's (Bobby Fischer) version.  2 different designs, so it makes no sense to compare them side by side.  NOJ makes the Dubrovnik 2 and the Minceta (Fischer), both different designs that came after the original. 

The SC pieces did a better job of recreating the space separating the 2 lower collars from the upper collar.  The SC queen has more cuts in the crown, as the 1950 version did.  the later versions only had 5 cuts vs 11.  The base shapes are much different also.  The SC pieces look more like the original as they are supposed to, although not nearly as exact as NOJ.  

Personally I prefer the original look, in part for its historical value, and the detail of the knight, but I do like those fat Minceta rooks.  The original knights do not have a forward point to the mane, while later versions did slightly, but not to the extent of the CB, RCM, or HOS efforts.  

 

Eyechess

Actually, you will note that I said I compared the Mandeep set with the original 1950 set at the Noj site.  
I certainly would not compare a 1950 reproduction as the Mandeep set and this set with any later editions.

Player_Breyer

Maybe "Zagreb 1970"? Look at Fisher - Udovcic image, IMHO this is Fischer set: https://en.chessbase.com/post/tournament-of-peace-in-zagreb-2018

 

ifekali
Player_Breyer wrote:

this is Fischer set

 

Damn right it is! (But note slightly slimmer rooks.)

-Izmet Fekali