Chess House has a nice-looking wooden board with algebraic notation.
Awwwwwwwwww. I have a kind of joke, that goes like this: You can always tell a master: he’s the one who comes in without a chessboard and clock.
To be honest, I am torn on this point. Many players have vinyl boards that have seen better days, a few actually have Kasparov’s autograph on it and they expect you to play on it (me, I’d frame the thing!), some have squares that are colored a kind of ocean blue and buff; and some have pieces that are downright filthy. Then there are the ones who fold their boards, so that when they are unrolled, you can begin to understand how chess may have originated as a wargame, because right smack in front of you are the Swiss Alps and the Piedmont, stretching out towards the eight rank.
Sometimes the lighting at the playing venue is so dim that it’s hard to make out the black plastic pieces from the dark green squares. And I keep my fngers crossed against the day when my opponent may want to play with a standard plastic set, with black pieces set on a board of black and buff.
The switch from analog clocks to digital has brought with it the whispered questions after the round begins: does your clock have a time delay? are those seconds or minutes? and confusion as to how the things work.
So yes, the GM has a valid point. But his words sound, well, a bit off-putting. One of my chess friends sometimes runs concessions at tournaments, and has actually had masters get mad at him for refusing to lend them a set and board. This is ironic, since masters know, or ought to know, how difficult it is to make a living at chess; and yet some are too cheap to shell out the bucks for something nice to bring to open tournaments.
I very much doubt that Bobby lugged his set and board to the opens he palyed in. But I know darn well that he had a very nice set ( Goggle “Dubrovnik 1950” and you can get the same one from a Slovakian company that sells them through ChessUSA). And, in his interview with Bobby in 1992, Yasser Seirawan writes of presenting Fischer with a nice set, and having Bobby critique the design. So it’s nice that Onischuk appreciates the finer things.
But, for crying out loud! Our tournament organizers have to put up with a lot of stuff to put on their events, and maybe it’s asking just a wee buit much to insist that they tote those heavy boards and pieces along with them. Please, Mr. Onischuk, grow up. Put some green into the economy and buy yourself a nice wooden set, clock and board. Figure $60 for a nice wooden set that you can take to tournaments (and not be out that much if some jerk rips it off; unfortunately, we have to take these things into consideration), $100 for a Chronos clock (get the sensor one so your opponent can’t get off by bashing captured pieces on the plungers), $15 or less for a nice roll-up board, or about $20 for a linen one. (If your opponent whines about there not be algebraic notation, tell him it’s time to learn and stand your ground if you have choice of equipment.) and whatever it is chess bags are going for nowadays. You’re coming in at under $250 for a very nice ensemble.
I have a quote too. “A master doesn’t need to bring a set or clock. He already has what no one else can buy: ability.” Something to consider before you tell a GM to grow up.
It’s like telling a guy, “Well, that major leaguer could play on my corporate softball team if he’d just buy himself a nice glove like I have. I just don’t understand why he doesn’t want to come down and shag some flies with us! The nerve!”
No, it is not the same. Your analogy, such as it is, makes no sense. You focused on the suggestions and totally missed the point. Masters do deserve respect for their chess ability. But not for whining.
And yes, the GM needs to grow up. Frankly, I can’t understand why anyone with an ear for public relations would be so stupid as to say what he said. Ability doesn’t equal maturity; and if he doesn’t like the conditions in many US tournaments, he can certainly do his part to make them better.
But stop blaming the organizers.
Finally, you make an ad hominem attack on my argument, in effect arguing that, becasue I have a lower-rating, I must therefore defer to our immature GM’s immature statement.
Do you really realize the implications of this? I have seen others use it (for instance, in arguing gaainst someone with a low chess rating policing the forum). Because it is patently absurd; and demonstrates how chess may be a great game, but it certainly hasn’t done much in the way of improving the day-to-day reasoning of its players.
Otherwise, you’d have to concede that Bobby was right in everything he had to say, each and every ugly thing about people who are dear to us. Do you really want to say that? Is the only peson who can criticize Fischer on being a Jew-hater Gary Kasparov (and that, arguably)? I do not think you mean that. But that’s where the logic of your statement takes you, and anyone else who uses such a ridiculous argument that any first-grader could demolish.
A few pictures from our most recent tournament are up on the SACA website. All sets and boards (including the wooden ones) were provided. 
- Enrique
Very nice indeed. I commend the SACA. I also enjoyed the website, Thank you for sharing.
That looked very nice.
Having grown up in England and moved to the US in 2002, I have seen the many differences in the way chess tournaments are organized here. In England, it’s almost unheard of to go to a tournament and have to bring your own chess set. I can’t ever remember having to do that. However, tournaments are frequently run by chess clubs, not organizations such as the SCCF, and most clubs have their own sets. County team matches also take place at a club’s venue and the club would be expected to provide the equipment for all boards (county matches are typically 16-board affairs). However, the clocks tended to be analogue ones, at least back in 2002. The club I played at only owned one or two digital clocks (a DGT, if I recall) and that was the same for most clubs. This ties in to some other differences, with adjudication still a common practice in England but quite unusual in the US, where it’s rarely necessary anyway with sudden death time controls that are easier to implement with digital clocks.
The first tournament I played in here, I was shocked when I turned up with no set and was told I should have brought one. Of course, that’s partially down to me not doing my research beforehand but it never occurred to me that the equipment wouldn’t be provided. As John Hillery is aware (being the TD!), the American Open a few months ago had wooden sets on the top 13 boards. They were provided by Chess Palace, though there was a bit of a debacle in one round when the sets weren’t ready and the round had to start 10 minutes late. I think that most tournaments in the US tend to be bigger, making it less practical from both a cost and time standpoint to set up so many boards between rounds.
I am grateful for the time and effort put in by organizers here and I think it’s asking too much (again, from both a cost and time standpoint) to expect there to be equipment provided. As others have mentioned, it doesn’t cost a lot to equip oneself with a chess set and clock (it probably costs less than a lot of tournament entry fees, in fact) and, assuming you have the black pieces or a cooperative opponent, you get to use your own set that you have become accustomed to.
A passing comment, such as what Onischuck made, isn’t whining. An analogy, such as what I made with the softball team example, isn’t an ad hominem attack. Unfortunately for the rest of your post, no one said anything about low ratings…rendering your attack on me useless (your final sentence is a decent example of an ad hominem attack, and it would be effective, if I were insecure enough to care).
On topic…not having nice sets for the top boards isn’t a bad thing, it’s just different. As arkazeus points out…the US has a different chess culture than other countries. Part of this is simply geographic country size. John H had a great point that hauling wooden sets can be a real pain; one reason of many why my own wood set rarely leaves home. But Enrique and other organizers are willing to risk a chiropractor bill to make it happen, and that definitely adds a certain something to the tournament hall. The rules are the same regardless of the equipment. As long as it’s a regulation or commonly-accepted set, I’ll play on whatever is provided. Brenan, if I ever make it to VA I’d even play on your Zagreb set in a tournament 
(Brenan was published in Chess Cafe on this subject in January… http://www.chesscafe.com/text/geurt129.pdf)
One correction: I was not the TD or organizer of the American Open. (That’s Randy Hough.) My only connection with the tournament was managing the web page and on-line entries. Oh, and I came by on Sunday to take photos for Rank & File.
Would a professional golfer show up at a tournament with out a set of clubs?
Did no one but me think his remark was tongue in cheek?
I’m willing to believe that Tiger Woods would play somewhat better with his own set of clubs than with a set he borrowed.
Is there reason to think a GM would play differently (much less better) when using a wooden set than when using a standard plastic set?
What in chess pieces would be the equivalent to Nike SasQuatch Fairway Woods?
Actually the answer in the Chesscafe piece was given according to FIDE regulations. My Zagreb '59 set might be viewed differently under USCF regs. But to eliminate any problem, I just bought a nice, inexpensive Championship series wooden set from House of Staunton; and that is what I use now. But there is no way I am going to lug around a wooden board!
The issue of whether one can criticize someone who is obviously talented in a specific area is one that is sometimes used on this forum to disregard otherwise good and valid points. We can certainly criticize a grandmaster for – what…whining? complaining and not doing anything about it? being a cheapo? – just as much as we can criticize ARod and all those other steriod-pumping baseball players for ruining a great game and being spoiled rich athletes to boot.
But that doesn’t mean we can stirke them out with our pathetic attempts at a fastball, any more than it means we can defeat them in a chess game. The GM put that comment out there for public consumption and, one assumes, public digestion as well. That it does not agree with some should be no surprise, any more than we should take at face value Ms. Polgar’s refusal a few years back to play chess in China and the excuses offered for THAT stance.
Golf clubs are a far cry from chess sets. Even a bad golfer can get extra yardage and control by making the switch from Dunlops to a Nike Sasquatch set (my switch from Wilsons to Titleists had a similar effect, and my handicap is nothing to be proud of 
). I’m not sure Rosewood adds anything to one’s chess ability – but what the heck, it looks nice.
If Gm. Onischuk showed up with a nice House of Staunton chess set with proper branding. what kind of image would he project?
I really like the new “mousepad material” boards. They don’t crinkle, the don’t leave any mountain ranges in the middle of the playing field.
I have owned a lot of House of Staunton sets, boards and cases. I sold a lot of stuff I don’t use but now use the following (Brenan, I have a good suggestion for you at the end, so stay with me through this):
-
House of Staunton Marshall Series 4.0 King in Rosewood with a Green and Bird’s Eye Maple 2 3/8" square Signature Traditional board. This is my nice set that very seldom leaves the house. I will bring it out for G120 and slower, sometimes. I just played with this setup Sunday with my friend Wayne and it plays very, very nice. Oh, I have a black Chronos with red buttons that goes nicely as the clock for this set.
-
I have a Zagreb 59’ Rosewood Set that goes with the Maple and Mahogany folding tournament board with the maple (light) frame in the deluxe tournament bag along with a USCF/Excalibur GameTime II clock. I use this for going to Barnes and Noble games and light tournament play.
-
I just got a Proline Series Rosewood set on sale, cheap. I matched that with the folding Maple and Mahogany tournament board with the Mahogany (dark) frame. I have a blue Chronos clock with red buttons matched with this set. I also picked up their Championship Series Rosewood set and matched it with the 2 1/4" square folding masonite board and another Excalibur GameTime II clock. I keep all this in another deluxe tournament bag. Yes this is heavy, but the Proline set and the Mahogany board is great for standard tournament play. I have the Championship set for rougher play and skittles.
-
Finally I have one of their Liberty Series Rosewood set with a mousepad board and a Chronos clock in silver (we sanded the stinkin’ creme color paint off to the natural aluminum) all in the House of Staunton standard tournament bag. I use this for skittle and blitz type of play, which I do about 2 hours a week minimum.
Anyway, my suggestion for Brenan is to buy a Proline Series Rosewood set. It is on sale now at 1/2 price and a great deal and also a really nice set to play tournaments with. If I didn’t already own the Marshall Series set, I would not buy one, as this Proline set is great. It is truly an exceptional value for the cost. The only thing is the crenelations (crown of points) on the Queens. If abused, those easily chip off. So, I cover those for storage and travel with 3/4 foam and rubber bands. I also carry the whole set in a couple of Rubbermaid containers with foam in them. I have not had one chip yet on the 7 or so sets that I owned that had those. It works great.
When I owned a lot of expensive sets and boards, I ran a tournament and put my nice stuff on the top 4 or 5 boards. One fellow had a tendency to slam the piece down on the square when he moved, like making a statement to his opponent. I got a little concerned, but everything was alright. There is a concern of the stuff getting beat up and such, so I would suggest using less expensive sets. Also, it is a real and true pain in many places to have to haul all the stuff, including wooden boards around.
Thanks Ron. I checked out the Proline Series set and don’t like the shape of the bishops. I also see what you mean about the crenalations on the queen. (This was a bugaboo of Bobby’s too: see Seirawan’s account of meeting him and giving him a set designed by the Inside Chess folks inhis great NO REGRETS book on the 1992 match with Spassky.)
A good wooden tournament set has to have reduced queen crenalations because all the packing and unpacking into a chess bag is inevitably going to chip the price. Setting up and packing up need to be relatively quick, and you can’t do this while worrying about the doggone queens. This is, incidentally, one of the virtues of the Zagreb '59 set: it does not have fragile edges.
You are right about the Marshall series. I had seen a photo of the set used by Alekhine and Capablanca in their 1927 match, and called Frank at the HoS and asked him if I could get one like that, and he directed me to the Marshall set. But because of the humidity rate around DC, he recommended that I get the ebonized version, which is less expensive than the ebony and easier to care for. I did, but seldom use it because the board for it is larger than the one I actually use (see below) and reaching to the eight rank while having a book in front of me is a bit of a stretch.
I also have an old Lardy set that my father gave me for Christmas one year, and three (!) Zagreb '59 sets – I truly love this set. But my favorite, which I use for analysis and playing over master games, etc. and looked for for years, is my Dubrovnik 50 set that I got from ChessUSA. This is the set that you see Bobby with on his LIFE magazine cover and on the cover of BOBBY FISCHER TEACHES CHESS I also have the green and bird’s eye maple board (I use this because it has the same color scheme as the roll-up boards or linen board I use at tournaments) and it is a beauty.
I don’t care for the mousepad boards, although they are certainly preferable to the ones that are not cared for properly. The problem with the mousepad is that you cannot move the pieces smoothly over the board – in blitz this is a big deal. Linen, wood or plastic are better.
Someone recently said that, if they could not play like a GM, they could at least look like one. I suppose that, for me, my love of nice chess sets is kind of like that. I just wish I had 100 rating points for every HoS set I own!