Reproduction and Real Jaques of London Chess Set

That looks like it works perfectly.  Thanks. 

I checked the HOS webiste and the king base is 1.875".  Then I checked their Cooke 1849 set with 4.4 inch king and the base is the same at 1.875.  Oddly though, HOS recommends 2.25" to 2.5" for the Centurion, but only 2.5" for the Cooke.  

I was leaning more towards a library size, but now I'm thinking club size.  But some of the sets I have been looking at only come with 3.5" king so I'm interested in seeing how that would look as well.  

Thanks for the pictures!

No problem! It's a great set, looks and plays great on the 2.25" board. Good luck in your search!

Nice  set!

That works just fine as well!   I guess a was over thinking it about having the perfect sized board for the pieces.  Good to know that 2.25"  is a board that accommodates the range I am looking at.  Thanks for the pictures.

I faced a similar choice. I bought my HOS Collector Series Luxury Chess Pieces - 4.0" King in Boxwood and Rosewood (No longer Offered) with a King Base of 1.85". The recommended square size is -- according to HOS  -- 2.375" / 60 mm;  OR 2.5" / 64 mm. My other board has 2.25" squares.  Given that I don't know if at some time in the future I might want to buy a FULL Club Sized set with a 4.4" King and give I was going through a Custom Made board (which I got at a STEAL but this was back in 2010 when we were still coming out of the "Great Recession" ) I went with a board with 2.5" squares. Given That I have Parkinson's I can use the little extra space so I don't have piece "straddling" squares. The recommended square size for most sets with a 4.4" king with a fairly wide base  such as 2.0" is 2.5" squares. In Europe such as the UK  many boards top out at 60 mm squares (2.375") which for me seems a bit crowded.  There are very, very few sets with a 4.4" king that can fit on a board with 2.25" squares, that have a very narrow king base, but these type of set for me are too top heavy and with my tremors would be a disaster in my hands.

Assuming you are going to buy an 1849 set the King base as I recall is ~ 2.0" . Given the choice between a board with 2.375" squares  and 2.5" squares, the 2.5" squares will be far better especially if you have tremors or have "pudgy fingers", as it will be a LOT easier to move your pieces around.... and it will look better too!

Forget putting something like a 1849 FULL Club sized 4.4" set on 2.25" squares.  IF you are stuck to a board with 2.25" squares don't go above anything set taller than a 4.0" king or the "Junior Club Size"  set. The best sets for a board with 2.25" squares is the Standard Tournament sized set which is a 3.75" King Size -- 3.875" King  (such as the HOS Zagreb '59 sets) where a 2.25" board or 2.375 is recommended.  Or if you are a History buff any of the the Dubrovnik Chess sets typically with kings in the 3.5 - 3.75" range will look good on a board with 2.25" squares.

In general the guide line is that king's base diameter and the square size  states the king's base diameter should be roughly 75-80% of the size of the square.  My own rule is that it if for any reason you have a medical condition square size range should be the 72-77%.  My HOS Collector Series Luxury Chess Pieces - 4.0" King in Boxwood and Rosewood, with a King Base size 1.85"  sits on a board with 2.5" squares  which comes in at 74%. Had I set it on a board with 2.375" squares that would have jumped to 78% . While  I have played with the set on a roll up board with 2.375" squares it was pushing the sort of crowded feeling and many times my pieces "straddling" squares. 

Hope this helps.

Thanks for the post. Your post illustrates my point. A BEAUTIFUL set!!!  "Blood Rosewood" I assume?!?  For me I'd probably DESTROY it just trying to move the pieces. With a King Base of 1.875" and a square size of 2.25" that comes out to be 83.33% square coverage, which for *ME* is way too tight. Put on a 2.375" board and you come in at 79% and on a 2.5" board it falls to 75%. 

Thanks for the photo of a BEAUTIFUL set!!!!

That is a seriously sweet setup.

I'm not as experienced as a lot of folks here but I agree with azbobcat's recommendations. I have several 3.75" sets and all look great on 2.25" squares. I have at least three 4" sets and they look good on either 2.25" or 2.5" squares, 2.375" may be perfect for them. I think 2.25" squares are too small for 4.4" sets even if their bases technically fit the percentage rule. Their height makes them look a little crowded to me.

It's all in the eye of the beholder, though. Some folks like more open boards, some a little tighter.

Thanks, @azbobcat, it is a beautiful set. Actually it's Red Sandalwood, which I understand is no longer available - at least for chess pieces. I got this set in the early 2000s. As for square size, you're absolutely right. It's a fine line among different players and finding the perfect ration can be tough. Enjoy!

I have read many posts when I was trying to create my custom board, about woods of all types. There seems to be an ongoing debate about "Blood Rosewood" -- notice the quotes -- which is what HOS claims to use, but many people claim that "Blood Rosewood" is actually Red Sandalwood, which is not to be confused with Blood Wood -- yes another very RED Wood -- while others claim that "Blood Rosewood" does not even exist. 

I was looking for a "unifying" color scheme to go with the HOS Collector Series Luxury Chess Pieces - 4.0" King in Boxwood and Rosewood pieces (bought in 2009, and no longer made). So I went with Purpleheart  and Curly Maple 2.5" squares; 4" Rosewood Border; Spalted Maple Corners and Delimiter; and finally a Bloodwood Inlay within the Border. Squares finished in a Satin Finish, and Border in Gloss Finish. Thus my very limited knowledge of RED woods.

If, as you claim, you can no longer get Red Sandalwood for chess pieces, it could be they have simply renamed it "Blood Rosewood" which has a similar name to "Blood Wood" and "Rosewood" -- though even there you need to be careful that it is Indian and not Brazilian Rosewood which is now Illegal to export or use -- to get around import/export restrictions.

I am sure the debate about "Red Sandalwood" --vs-- "Blood Rosewood" will continue to rage I am sure; still regardless that is one BEAUTIFUL set you have!! 

                                               This is that Custom Board

                                   The set as set up. 4" King w/1.85" base on 2.5" Squares

                           Red, Purple, Brown, and Cream --Oh My!!!

I've tried several times to photograph this set This is a close to a decent exposure as I could get. Once I have finished moving into my apartment I may have a go at it again.

That is one heck of a nice chess board azbobcat!

I've read many of the padouk, blood rosewood, red sandalwood arguments. I don't know what the answers are but my opinion is padouk and blood (or bud) rosewood are the same. I think red sandalwood is similar but a little different. Here's a picture of a curly maple/padouk board with pieces from two different "blood rosewood" sets. I apologize for the bad quality. My camera recently died and I had to take these with a tablet camera. The two pieces on the right are a HOS 3.75" Collector, the two on the left are a HOS 4.0" Marshall. The Collector set is darker and, along with its grain pattern, is an almost perfect match to the padouk squares on the board. The Marshall set is lighter, redder, and has a slightly more pronounced grain. It could just be a difference in wood stock and aging but I believe the Collector set to be padouk and the Marshall to be sandalwood. I'm not certain enough to argue about it, though.

Oh, this is the board. I got it for a good price on ebay some years ago.

http://www.customchess.com/boards/board006/board006.asp

For red sandalwood, look at the "Conservation Actions in Detail" link on this page:https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/32104/67803072 its not surprising that it would be hard to get.  

Chess Set Sizing - Pieces vs Board...

The primary sizing criteria for the set and board is that of square size vs King base diameter...
A good rule of thumb is...
King base diameter = 0.75 * square size
or equivalently....
Square size = 1.33 * King base diameter
Any variation from these ratios, or the size of individual pieces and pawns is a matter of personal preference...

http://blog.chesshouse.com/how-to-select-the-right-size-chessboard-for-pieces/

@azbobcat, yes you have a beautiful board and set! Very nice! I agree, the various names for the same wood types can be dizzying and frustrating, no argument from me. HoS called it Red Sandalwood so I will continue to say the same, but you're right, it could be something else.

@greghunt, thanks for the link. I believe I have seen something similar to that in the past during a similar discussion, which is why I said what I did about Red Sandalwood. It's too bad if it is in dnger of being wiped out, it is a beautiful wood.

As a side note the guy who made your board was the was the same guy who I sat down with to design my board. I immediately recognized your board as it is featured in his gallery, as is my board (I think my board is listed as #077 if I recall correctly). His boards have a certain custom look and finish, and he puts in hours of work on each board. He made mine right after the "Great Recession" ended. That is a CLASSIC board you have and it is a one of a kind as is my board. In my case due to my Parkinson's I had him install rubber legs to absorb the shock of trying to put it down. Hang onto the board and take good care of it. 

As soon as I looked at the your picture, and then at your link ,

Any thoughts on this please: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/223756471400?ul_noapp=true

I suspect the price is a little high for a set with no box and a replacement Knight. Do you agree with the seller's assessment of 1850?

At least the restoration has already been done.  Should there be those stickers on the felt?

I had been saving up for a board like yours when I stumbled onto this one on ebay. Since I'd often been drooling over his website I also recognized it immediately. He does nice work. It's good he was able to accommodate your needs.

Thanks for posting that Greg. Should we avoid red sandalwood then in order not increase the demand for it? I don't know much about this stuff