Why would you want notations? They ruin the look of the board IMO
Post your library size set
Sort:
IpswichMatt wrote:
Why would you want notations? They ruin the look of the board IMO
I'd like to use it as a study set and I need the notations to follow.
@IpswitchMatt: True, but this is my beginner’s board. It’s for analyzing and learning. On a nice board i would not dare... 😁
@QueenClaudia2003: try small alphabetic character stickers...
Apr 5, 2021
0
#25
QueenClaudia2003 wrote:
IpswichMatt wrote:
Why would you want notations? They ruin the look of the board IMO
I'd like to use it as a study set and I need the notations to follow.
You won't need them for long if you continue to play. And when you no longer need them, seeing them there will annoy you
Apr 5, 2021
0
#26
IpswichMatt ha scritto:
QueenClaudia2003 wrote:
IpswichMatt wrote:
Why would you want notations? They ruin the look of the board IMO
I'd like to use it as a study set and I need the notations to follow.
You won't need them for long if you continue to play. And when you no longer need them, seeing them there will annoy you
I personally don't mind them, it's one of the things that if they're present that's ok if not it's the same. The only thing with algebric notation is that I just need to flip the board every time for my OCD, I can't stand white on h-a ahahah
Probably be years before I can remember as I'm awful without them have to count everything out with my finger otherwise and by the time I've done that can't remember what the heck I was doing anyway!
I have thought of stickers bu worried it might leave Mark's on the board.
You'll learn it quick by heart. Just remember the center 4 squares. Any position from there it's easy counting.
If you have the space you could try labeling paper strips to lay alongside the board. That way you dont have to worry about adhesive residue.
QueenClaudia2003 wrote:
Probably be years before I can remember as I'm awful without them have to count everything out with my finger otherwise and by the time I've done that can't remember what the heck I was doing anyway!
I have thought of stickers bu worried it might leave Mark's on the board.
I am also learning coordinates and have improved drastically. Hover your mouse over learn on the far left, and then click on "Vision." Each session runs for 30 seconds and I suggest placing your emphasis on accuracy not speed at first. Also do a few on white and then do a few on black so you become familiar with both viewpoints. DO them often, and you will see a difference. One thing that helped me is staring at the board and trying to commit to visual memory that the two center ranks are 4 and 5, and the two center files are d and e. I was also going to suggest paper/thin card board, but cut it to fit so you can lay it on the boards border..
Best wishes.
Again lovely boards and pieces everyone.
Junckerlz wrote:
TheOneCalledMichael wrote:
I think many people here have at least one library size set for analyzing or when there isn't much space in the study room. I prefer library size over full size when analyzing games, it just plays quicker.
Let's see what you have, after all we love pictures here
Looking back this set is not really convenient as analyze set, looks pretty but too fragile (3").
This is the set I use the most. It's utilitarian set, light but still handles very well (3.15").
What are the pieces called in your first set?
I made a review of it here: https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-equipment/review-of-staunton-castle-library-size-chess-set
Apr 6, 2021
0
#32
beachero wrote:
Here's one of my 2.75" sets on an old walnut and birch Drueke board. Not sure what exactly this set is, my hunch is early 1900's German (or even American?). If you have any ideas, let me know.
Not sure the origin of your set, but I love it. Unique style and shapes. Great set!
Apr 17, 2021
0
#36
Here I am teaching in the library using standard sets . . .
Three sets fit perfectly on each library table, which are vynil roll up standard club weighted sets . . . .
Apr 17, 2021
0
#37
I am thinking the term library came from one poster that said it was from Victorian Era with people who have money to afford a personal library in their home. Since libraries don't need huge or standard size tables. The tables were smaller in size which causes chess sets to be smaller in order to be played on the smaller size tables. This is all speculation on my end but it would make sense of the origin of the term. I would consider 2.875"-3.25" to be in the range of Library size. Smaller it is travel/analysis size. Bigger is club/tournament size. I have had sets all within this range but the 3.25" size is my favorite size of the Library size category.
Here's a set that would make for a great set to use for a Straight Up Chessboard in the Library.
3.1" Library Series Staunton Chess Pieces Only Set - Weighted Boxwood (royalchessmall.com)
I play either against my brother or my father and I gotta say I get used quickly playing that size. I like analyzing games and for that I prefer this size than the 3.75" size.
One thing I notice the other day, when playing this library size set it feels like playing a friendly game but when playing full size / tournament size set then somehow I feel serious and give much more thoughts on every move.
Apr 17, 2021
0
#39
@TheOneCalledMichael yes I agree with your point on the feeling that playing on smaller sets tends to feel more friendly. Could be due to library sized sets can't be used for tournament play. Where tournament sized set are mainly used for serious competition. However I do experience the same friendly feeling with a tournament size set that in not mainly used for tournament play. If it's a luxury set with fancier designs. I would feel like it's a chilled friendly game as well. Size and design I believe is what makes us feel the difference.
My official World Class Studio Club Set on a cheap foldable 40mm board.
76mm King with 30mm Base...
I like your chess set. Reminds me a little of mine although my board is 35cm and kind is 3 inches. I love this set but only wish it had notations like yours.