felonet wrote:
@bananamoon is that walnut or stained?
Walnut
NOJ Dubrovnik Opinions Wanted
Sort:
@ Newcastle1974 I just realized you posted very helpful pictures! I checked this thread on my computer and was pumped to discover that! They were not showing up in the app for some reason...
Your first picture is probably the exact picture I need to make my decision... now if I could only decide on Walnut vs Stained!
If durability is your priority then maple. If aesthetic is your priority then walnut.
Mar 20, 2025
0
#26
From what I’ve gathered, walnut seems to be more in line with the historical spirit of these pieces. I would be inclined to go with walnut but the brown stain and red stain are both gorgeous as well. Tough decision but you can’t go wrong either.
Mar 20, 2025
0
#27
Their red stain is simply stunning! See? We can spend all of anybody's money! 
Mar 20, 2025
0
#28
Hi @felonet,
I know you've already received a lot of insightful responses, but I'd like to add to the discussion.
I own a Noj Dubrovnik Minceta, unweighted, in maple and walnut. As a big fan of Fischer, I chose the Minceta because it's the closest match to his set. I opted for the unweighted version since Bobby's set was also unweighted, and I wanted to experience how stable the pieces felt. I ended up falling in love with it, and now I only buy unweighted sets.
I chose natural maple and walnut for two reasons: (1) the elegance of the pieces and (2) my past experiences with stained pieces haven’t been great—sooner or later, the stain starts to wear off, which bothers me a lot.
Overall, the pieces are exceptionally elegant, and you can truly see and feel the craftsmanship that goes into each one. In my opinion, no other chess manufacturer matches the refinement and care that Gregor and his family put into their work.
Even though the pieces are unweighted, they are well-balanced and stable. You can almost replicate the smoothness with which Fischer handled his pieces. Once you "become one" with them, you naturally develop your own way of pushing them across the board 
That said, I don't use my Noj pieces to play with others, so I can't say how they would hold up in a setting where multiple people are handling them, possibly dropping them, or playing more roughly.
As for the 1950s set, I like my Minceta so much that now I also want the 1950s version—not just for its elegance but also for its historical significance. Last year I tried a 1950s set from Royal Chess Mall (RCM), unweighted, in boxwood and mahogany stain. While I found it interesting, it was far from the original design. The pieces were decent but too large and bulky, making them feel awkward to handle. I ended up selling that set and am now on Noj’s waiting list for an unweighted 1950s set in maple and walnut.
Below, you can see some pictures comparing the Noj Minceta (Left) and the RCM (Right) pieces on a board with 55mm squares. I hope some of the points shared help inform your decision.
@paulo_armi I appreciate you chiming in with your experiences. Your visual comparisons to the RCM Dubrovnik underline the entire reason I made my original post! The “chunky” Minceta is elegant by comparison (and I assume better handling). Very helpful to see…
A couple questions:
- Are your walnut Minceta pieces heavily striped? I don’t mind a little visible grain - but I’m not a big fan of “tiger striped” pieces. Do you have any pictures?
- Is there anything in particular you like about the 1950 over your Minceta? Like are you buying it for slower games because it’s (apparently) smaller and more elegant?
magictwanger wrote:
Just buy the darn thing quickly! My "only" Noj set is the Tal.
If this thread goes too long, I could be tempted and that would mean my wife halts cooking for me. I've only got 27 chess sets, if you include 4 travel sizes.....4 nice/big boards though....Sheesh. That Minceta sure looks nice!
Am I going to have to cancel another astro binocular, or high end earbud?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPDal9qgrjc
magictwanger In a time when it was simple , just needed to have long hair !!!!!!!!!
Mar 20, 2025
0
#31
Hi Felonet in your video above you are referring to a book. What book is that?
Thanks
Bamboo58
Mar 21, 2025
0
#32
@felonet
1. The pieces are very lightly striped. I’m not a fan of heavily striped wood either – I find it distracting. I usually avoid Sheesham or rosewood pieces for that reason. I've attached some pictures of the Minceta pieces so you can, hopefully, see the grain for yourself.
2. I like that the 1950 pieces are sleeker than the Minceta – they have a more elegant look, which makes them feel perfect for analysis or slower, more thoughtful games (ideally with a good glass of wine at hand). I also really like the more detailed knight. That said, I tend to switch sets depending on my mood or the occasion. At the end of the day, it all comes down to personal preference.
a. Artificial light, night setting
b. Natural light, mid afternoon
c. Artificial light, night setting
Beautiful!
Thank you for the additional pictures! I gotta say I think I'm leaning Minceta.. I just have a few final concerns about the bases
Mar 21, 2025
0
#35
Hello @felonet,
Seems like the dubrovnik addiction also got you.
5 years ago I acquired the CB Dubrovnik which was the cheapest option. I was satisfied and giving it plenty of use with family and friends. Then 2 years later I decided to buy the SC 1950 boxwood & padauk (nice red color) for a higher value. Excellent set, hefty, playable and very nice knight design. It fits better in a large board (55 to 60 mm) Then last year after 1 year in the waiting list I bought from NOJ the Mincetta Maple & Walnut weighted. A more serious investment but, imho, a true piece of craftsmanship and impecable finish.
I am very pleased with the NOJ set.
In brief, all are good choices. The NOJ is top notch, the SC is great and the CB is nice/ok.
If money is not an issue, buy the NOJ and that’s it. No regrets at all from my side. Superb quality and great attention from Gregor.
I will post some pictures in the next few days, since I am away traveling.
Good luck with your choice!
@ferpesan - I would be particularly interested in a size comparison between your SC and Minceta sets. Have you ever got the itch for a NOJ 1950 or are you content w/ the Minceta
Mar 21, 2025
0
#37
The fat rook from the mincetta is very nice. The dub 2/mincetta design are more appealing to me than the 1950. However it is a matter of taste and preference.
Mar 22, 2025
0
#38
As promised:
Kings NOJ SC CB
Queens
I don’t know why, but I can’t upload more and the app turns them 90 degrees…
will try in a new post.
I had problems with rotated photos until I read where someone said that resizing the photo slightly would prevent the rotation.
Any slight editing of a picture can help, as Powderdigit suggested, or any slight resizing of the photos in the post itself, by clicking on the photo and using click&drag on the blue 'cornerstones' that appear then can help, as desperate once advised me (-Wow, his account is really gone, our conversation is gone from my messages, too).
I have not checked how it is today, but not long ago a change in the website had caused all old uploaded pictures to show up only in part. You could still access the whole picture by going 'open in extra tab', but in the thread itself, only a truncated version- whatever an AI took for essential to fit a format, I guess- appeared. That can be taken care of by resizing the pic within the post.
So you once displayed two rows of chessmen, now the photo appears only showing the line-up without knights and rooks, you go 'edit', click on your pic, grab the blue cornerstone and drag it a bit in, and then 'post' and you will see your picture displayed within the thread as a whole, with rooks and knights, as you originally intended.
Hello chess lovers!
I come to solicit detailed opinions from my fellow chess internet friends. Only true Chess Books & Equipment forum members will understand this post!
I currently own an SC 1950 reproduction which is a fine set. Over time I am bothered by a few peculiarities:
I play rated games with my SC 1950 and perform analysis at home w/ my Smyslova. I have become accustomed to the breathability and elegance of the Smyslova which only further highlight my gripes w/ the SC 1950."
I noticed you didn't mention anything about the weight. In the past the weight of the pieces was low, personally I like them heavy. Then there is the color: Black, ebonized not so good in my opinion, I like the mahogany or Padauk, I like warm colors.
Then another problem is the color of the chessboard compared to the pieces and squares.
And then there is the color of the White pieces, I like distressed. Now are they a perfect replica of what was made in 1950? Surely not, but we are not living in the 1950 anymore, the world changed... that world is nearly dead... anyway I like the following set, it's bigger (but I have big hands) and heavier that the originals... (just for sake of clarity, I have nothing against little people with little hands surely the 3.2" kings are perfect for them)
Here you can see mine in action with a Fischer game: