The bigger the better IMHO but what's even more important to me is the heavier the pieces the better. And I think the bigger the pricier so that may be an issue as well.
I don't think anyone else can make your mind up for you here. JOL is a reputable dealer but so are several other outfits online you can buy from.
Here is one of probably dozens of blogs about chess sets/bds here:
http://blog.chess.com/NimzoRoy/nimzoroy-and-chess-set
I have bought a large number of Staunton chess sets of varying sizes and prices over a period of 40 years. For a high-quality set like the Jaques, I would recommend a set with a 3.75 inch king and a board with 2.25 inch squares. This size has always seemed to me to be the best balanced and the most appealing. Hope this helps!
Thank you for your advices !
So, JOL make chess set 4" and 3,5", I like the Fisher-Spassky 3,5" and the very beautifull 4" 1849 Staunton chess set, it is not the same price.
1972 Fisher spassky chess set 3,5"
I have a 3.75" House of Staunton set, which is absolutely beautiful and a pleasure to play games on. I find that it is a little bit too big for analysis, however, because sometimes you want to be able to rearrange the pieces quickly (e.g. going from the end of a variation listed in a book back to the original position). This is inevitably slower with larger and heavier pieces, so I'd actually recommend the 3.5" set. YMMV, of course.
Hello,
What is your size prefered with a chess set in wooden, 3,5" - 3,75" - 4" or 4,4" ?
I want to buy a chess set from Jaque of London and I hesitate between the differents sizes, I like the chess set JOL.
I use a 3,75" chess set in a club but I want a chess set for playing and analysis at home.