Show us your chess set!

Lol is this the find what's different game?

Great sets bananamoon. The Soviet style set goes very well with that board

This is the set and board over which I learned playing chess, almost 40 years ago   

It is a vintage boxwood/ebonized boxwood set originally bought by my grandfather during his university days in Naples, Italy, in the late 1920s. I always liked the shape and fierce look of the knights: I don't remember seeing other Staunton sets with this particular design... 

I got a door noker

I got a back door

I got 2 Knockerz.

MAY i show you

My Nokerz?

or, Nakers

may-bee

 "Crackerz"

I got good "Stuff" 

Pluss I'll be back.

 2 beautiful sets thank you for sharing Liara!

I like Robertos old Italian set as well.  The knights definitely have Italian flare! 

Roberto  - 
That's one of my favorite sets (especially love the board) I've seen on this site. Beautiful. 

Thanks!  

BTW, going back to the discussion from a few posts earlier about the Lewis chessmen: if they are not chess pieces, then they must surely be miniatures for playing Dungeons & Dragons. What else? But the question then is: where are the dragons?? As long as they are not found, they remain chess pieces to me! 

Yes I agree, and I've been meaning to come back and comment on the earlier link to the article that casts doubt on the Lewis pieces being actual chess pieces.  I finally read that article and I must say that it is not well done.  It has an agenda to proclaim them not chess pieces and uses very shoddy arguments.  For example:

1.  It ridicules a story about the origin of the pieces, but it is a story I have never heard before and not part of the history that speculated by real historians.  It takes a fake story and proclaims it to be fake.  

2.  It claims their are no rooks, and that the warders and or berzerkers could not be rooks because they are too powerful to be such small pieces.  Modern chess pieces including Staunton, also have rooks as the shortest pieces!

3.  It claims they couldn't be chess pieces because they are all one color.  Traces of red coloring were found on some of the pieces, but being biodgradable They lost their coloring over centuries of time.  

4.  It claims that if they were chess pieces there would have been a board to go with the pieces.  Boards were usually wood and would have decomposed over time.  

4.  It claims that the pieces were probably from another type Scandinavian board game.  The pieces resemble chess pieces much more closely than they resemble pieces of that other board game, and that board game would also have a board associated with it, making the previous point more absurd. 

5.  It claims there were no bishops in chess until the 15th century.  I believe that that is incorrect, and the Lewis pieces are more evidence of that. 

6.  There should have been more pawns.  This is true.  Perhaps the pawns, being simpler pieces and not elaborate human like sculptures, were kept in a less secure or less protective bag.     

So I think the evidence that they are chess pieces is much stronger than the evidence against, if this is representative of the argument against.  And the people expert in this type of thing, such as the historians at the British Museum and Museum of Scotland, believe them to be chess pieces.  

Again I will say that it isn't important to me.  They are fascinating historic figures that make a beautiful chess set regardless of whether it was their original intent.  

Just got this 1849 yesterday from CB

Nice! How do you like it so far? 
ALSO... what board is that? I love it! 

It is great, the pieces are so smooth and have a nice heft to them. They slide like butter across the board. Amazing how much bigger it feels compared to my other set I got a few years ago. It seemed big but now compared to this one is small.

The board is the 

Ebony Sheesham Wood 23" - 60 mm

Is it a 4.5" king?  With 2.25" squares?  

I've given some thought into what makes the perfect chess board + set combination and your pictures exemplify what I've discovered on my own, mainly:

1. The border beyond the 64 squares should be distinctively different from both the light and dark squares.
2. The white pieces should not closely match the color/tone of the light squares; the black pieces should not closely match the color/tone of the dark squares.

Criteria #1 above is surprisingly difficult to fulfill, as it is common to have the border match either the light or the dark squares.

Criteria #2 is easily violated if one chooses a board with ebony black squares + pieces with ebony/ebonized pieces. The pieces tend to get lost on the board if they blend in too much with the board.