English Chess Forum

Hello all, some friends are playing in Teplice, CZ this weekend. One, who played there last year drew my attention to an oddity regarding the sets they use (see attached image). The kings are giant bishops Why don't people stick to Staunton sets? Would a player have grounds for complaint if he moved his king like a bishop and lost the game due to an illegal move? I'm sure someone must have in time trouble.

That’s horrible! I’d be well annoyed at paying for flights and accommodation only to find myself playing with non-standard pieces.
Do the rules of chess have anything to say about the height, shape etc of chess pieces?

Qb6+, Kxb6!

Niall Doran wrote:Do the rules of chess have anything to say about the height, shape etc of chess pieces?

Nothing at all, as far as I can see. There's a picture of some Staunton pieces at the end of Article 2.2 (http://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html? ... ew=article), but no requirement to use them. It does make you wonder what would happen if a team turned up for a league match to find a Lord of the Rings set on Board 1, a Star Trek set on Board 2, a Harry Potter set on Board 3 and so on.

Can still remember trying to play outdoors chess on a set York were given by (I believe) Munster. A giant wooden set in a very interesting sort of abstract design to look at. To play with? Thoroughly painful.

Isn't it simply that said design *is* common in that part of the world?

I've certainly seen pics of pieces like that in E European tournaments before.......

(after all it is a modification of the "standard" Staunton template, not something completely bizarre and new)

Ian Kingston wrote:

Niall Doran wrote:Do the rules of chess have anything to say about the height, shape etc of chess pieces?

Nothing at all, as far as I can see. There's a picture of some Staunton pieces at the end of Article 2.2 (http://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html? ... ew=article), but no requirement to use them. It does make you wonder what would happen if a team turned up for a league match to find a Lord of the Rings set on Board 1, a Star Trek set on Board 2, a Harry Potter set on Board 3 and so on.

That would be interesting to see.

Matt Mackenzie wrote:
Isn't it simply that said design * is* common in that part of the world ?

I think it is, as I have a chess set given to me by someone who bought it while on holiday in Russia and the king is of that design.

They can be quite beautiful, these Eastern chess sets.

I found this a very interesting article: http://www.bestchessmenever.com/blog/fi ... s-set.html

Ian Kingston wrote:

Niall Doran wrote:Do the rules of chess have anything to say about the height, shape etc of chess pieces?

Nothing at all, as far as I can see. There's a picture of some Staunton pieces at the end of Article 2.2 (http://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html? ... ew=article), but no requirement to use them. It does make you wonder what would happen if a team turned up for a league match to find a Lord of the Rings set on Board 1, a Star Trek set on Board 2, a Harry Potter set on Board 3 and so on.

You got the job

So to clarify, there is no ruling on the type of set used in tournaments? Also, some players like to use their own board too. If it has light and dark squares, then is there any ruling over that. I used to know someone who always wanted to play with his own board, on which the dark squares were red and the light squares were white. Many people didn't want to use his board but were too polite to say so.

Barry Sandercock wrote:Matt Mackenzie wrote:
Isn't it simply that said design * is* common in that part of the world ?

I think it is, as I have a chess set given to me by someone who bought it while on holiday in Russia and the king is of that design.

When I lived in Azerbaijan they also played with such sets. I think in communist days they removed the religious aspect from the pieces. I don't know if they did that before that. Someone else might.

JustinHorton wrote:

Ian Kingston wrote:

Niall Doran wrote:Do the rules of chess have anything to say about the height, shape etc of chess pieces?

Nothing at all, as far as I can see. There's a picture of some Staunton pieces at the end of Article 2.2 (http://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html? ... ew=article), but no requirement to use them. It does make you wonder what would happen if a team turned up for a league match to find a Lord of the Rings set on Board 1, a Star Trek set on Board 2, a Harry Potter set on Board 3 and so on.

You got the job

If it were the last match of the season and the result didn't matter, it would be very tempting.

Standard sets would be brought out once the opposition had got over the shock. I'm not mad enough to play with a set that requires notation like 'Star Fleet Redshirt takes Klingon Warrior'.

MJMcCready wrote:So to clarify, there is no ruling on the type of set used in tournaments?

There are guidelines here, but I think they only apply to official FIDE events, not events that are just FIDE-rated.

MJMcCready wrote:Also, some players like to use their own board too. If it has light and dark squares, then is there any ruling over that. I used to know someone who always wanted to play with his own board, on which the dark squares were red and the light squares were white.

In America, where providing your own equipment is common, I once had an opponent who provided a board covered in graffiti (although my opponent probably considered it to be a prized board with many squares containing the signatures of well-known American players).

Why doesn't that surprise me?