Lardy appreciation thread.

This is my Rechapados Ferrer board, purchased from strategygames.ca a couple of years ago. 2 inch squares.

OK, I like my 1974 Olympiad Lardy a lot except for the weight. A touch light for my taste. Who makes the closest reproduction to that Lardy version? I've looked at the HoS version and the Queens don't look like Lardy Queens to me.

I think TCE makes the closest reproduction but that’s my opinion. There have been some Lardy collectors that have disagreed.

Here is my 3.75” 70s Lardy.

Very close with the exception of the dimensions. Unplayable on 2.25 inch square and the ratio of base to height on king is less than 0.40.

I think any 3.5” Lardy reproduction or original wouldn’t be playable on a 2.25” board.

True...the point being that I was asking for the closest reproduction of a 3-3/4 70's Olympiad set. A 3.5 inch reproduction that looks exactly the same as the 3.75 inch fails ad a reproduction if it isn't the same size.

I think this might be a Spanish set?

Kings about 4.35 in

4.25

The Lardy is a brilliant example of exquisite design aesthetics with simple craftsmanship.

I personally love my walnut stained Lardy which feels great in hands and on the board.

Also glad that the Lardy's gave the queen, the stature it deserved.

Although I love the 70s Lardy, I actually prefer the older ones (sorry). Here's a recently obtained one from the 50s:

I'm a big fan of the bulbous bishop and wide crennelation on the rook in this set. It's only 3.5" but the perfect size for a casual game at home.

Great set. May I ask how much did you end up paying for it ? Thank you

The lardy sets are great. Very nice to play for a classic game. I prefer 3.8 to 4 inch king height

I didn’t realize they made a 3.8” version.

I am referring to the reproductions which are mostly tournament sized.

Hi Everyone, I am after your insight regarding this Lardy’esque set please. I say Lardy’esque because I cannot be sure it is - indeed, it is most probably not a Lardy. I have no provenance. For context, I will say the following with some level of confidence.

• The light side is not Jura wood - it does it have the complex swirls. Nor do I believe it to be boxwood - just based in a comparison with many other boxwood sets. I am intrigued by some of the dark streaks and blemishes in the light-side pieces too.
• It is old … if it is a reproduction - it’s not a modern one. That patina says it all but also the gent I purchased it off (it came with my favourite old vintage board) said it was old when he got it and it was originally from England (not made in England - rather that’s where it came from when he got it).
• It’s very lightly weighted.

While Lardy-like - why the lathe marks - or whatever they are at the top of the queen?

I’ve added king size photos for reference. 

Anyway - any help or hypothesis would be appreciated. 
I flip and flop on my like if this design… I am currently liking it. Interestingly, I nearly sold it recently and then took it off the market because I don’t think I’ll easily find another like it ( they are not easy to come by in Australia )… I’d miss it if it was gone; so I guess - in the flip and flop stakes - I must like it! 🤦‍♂️😊
Thanks in advance for any constructive thoughts. I realise I can’t get certainty - rather I am simply curious to learn more.

I thought someone would answer by now. Anyhow, I don’t have a clue what it is Powder. Without the swirls, it can’t be Jurawood. The set could be an Indian repro. See post 22 in https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-equipment/the-lardy-of-all-lardys?page=2. @CGrau talks about Indian copies.

I hope someone can shed some light. I would be interested to know the origins of your set.