Which Dubrovnik Set do you like betterChessBazaar or House of Staunton?

For those people with the Chessbazaar Dubrovnik pieces. What board size do you like the most? I still have them on a 2.25" board but I can't get used to the huge pawn diameter. Anyone tried the set on a 2.35 inch board?

I've researched some topics about the best piece scaling. That both FIDE and USCF recommend the king diameter being 75%. I guess I'm too much used to European chess sets where the king diameter is more close to 68-70% and you can easily fit 4 pawns on a square. I guess the DGT sets also use the ' European' scaling more?

Duvupov,

Here's an interesting approach to sizing chess pieces and boards I came up with a while back. If you're starting from scratch, there a couple of things to consider. First, are the proportions of your chess set visually balanced? Are the size of the pawns (half of all pieces on the chessboard) proportional to the back-row pieces? And, are the back-row pieces proportional to one another? Without a proportional set, it can be difficult to match it to a chessboard. I once had a set with traditional Staunton proportions, when I matched it to a board based on the king's dimensions, the pawns were literally swimming inside their squares. And when I matched the set based on the size of the pawns, the king was so crowded he became claustrophobic!

The calculations I propose will enable you to do both, find a balanced chess set, and find the right size board to battle on. To adjust for personal preference, you can always adjust the board size up or down to the next size board. either way, the set itself will maintain a balanced proportion.

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-equipment/a-system-for-sizing-chess-pieces-and-boards-long

Thanks for the answer. I know of that method and topic. The only thing that strikes me as weird is that in Western European standards and even the professional DGT tournament setups don't follow the FIDE/USCF guidelines at all regarding the king base. There it's more close to 68-70% with four pawns fitting on a square than the 72-75% rule and two pawns diagonal. I also think that chess collectors who want to display their beatiful boards have a different preference. 

I ordered a board with 60mm squares for my CB Dubrovnik pieces. Because to me 32mm pawns on 57mm squares is way too cramped. With a king that is 42mm the king diameter is still okay. Going to post a picture when it arrives. 

You are right. But I still find it fun to discuss about! 

Very happy with my 60mm squares for my Chessbazaar Dubrovniks. Feels way more natural to me. 

Late to the party, but my choice of Dubrovnik is the DGT-enabled Dubrovnik chess set by House of Staunton. Currently out of stock.

https://www.houseofstaunton.com/dgt-projects-electronic-chess-pieces-dubrovnik-3-75-king-height.html

Chessbazaar can never get the correct proportions right in their reproductions and that is the main reason why their chess sets look too much of a copy. 

Sold my HoS version and picked up the 1950 Dubrovnik set by Staunton Castle pictured below. I prefer the original design to the Dubrovnik II sets offered by CB and HoS.

Agreed. Best repro I have seen of 1950 set. Pity it isn't the same size as the original (89mm).

Yup, I would! from Post #189:

Thanks everyone for your contributions to this Post. Me? I love it!

and then with another lottery win I'd maybe go for this but... the mane, the mane.

I need a set with the other night, the 3 colored finials & no DGT. Is that too much to ask?!

Funny I never realized the pointy mane of the HoS Dubrovnik II Knight. Must have been too focused on the games once they’re on the board. 
I also prefer the almond-shaped Bishop compared to the the watermelon seed that other manufactures put out. 

If it was the original size, with a king diameter of 37.5mm (1.48"), it would be too small for a standard 2.25" chessboard, with a ratio of only 66%, outside of FIDE regs. The original set works much better on a 2" (50mm) board where the King diameter is 75%.

Besides, that’s an additional $29 for the optional lacquer treatment to get that glossy finish at chessbazaar.com. 

An 89mm set of Dubrovnik (not all 89mm sets though) will fit perfectly on a 55mm board (2 1/8") given it is fairly chunky. All DGT competition boards are 55mm so this has been the standard for many years. Prior to DGT (1990s and before) many (World Championships, Grand Prix etc.) serious top level competitions used Chavet 3.65" set also on 55mm boards. So in FIDE terms I think 55mm can reasonably be regarded as standard.  

Staunton Castle has tried to produce a better copy than Chessbazaar but still has not been able to get it right specially as the bases of all the chessmen retain a normal staunton character. Noj reproduction is still the most accurate and best.

I would agree if you're referring to the original NOJ 1950 set. No question. But the latest NOJ version appears to have a few changes which for me detract from the appearance. There is a separate thread on here discussing this.

Polar,

I own a couple of glossy sets, under normal lighting conditions there isn't an issue with glare. The problem arises with spotlighting. Pictures on vendor websites can be a bit misleading as the additional lighting required for the photoshoot intensifies the glare. 

Between CB and HOS, I prefer the HOS' The Fischer Dubrovnik Series Chess Pieces with 3.625" King.

https://www.houseofstaunton.com/the-fischer-dubrovnik-series-chess-pieces-3625-king.html

They're always sold out with the brown Anjan model (pictured above). Having said that, I'm sure both CB and HOS Dubrovnik handles well during play.

I agree, I've had similar issues with a few HoS sets. If there's a problem, their attitude seems to be, "prove it!" Which makes no sense. Why would I send a piece back if it wasn't damaged? I had to build a case for every piece I had to return.