Dubrovnik Reproduction Accuracy

I'll bite... and try to save a thread..

IMO, NOJ does the most accurate and highest quality reproduction of Pero Pocek's original chess set designed for the IX Chess Olympiad in Dubrovnik, Yugoslavia (present day Croatia).  I say this for a few reasons:

• • NOJ is carving these pieces in Ljubljana, Slovenia (formerly Yugoslavia) with the same traditions, techniques and materials used in the original set
  • NOJ had physical access to the VERY rare to find original chess sets from the IX Chess Olympiad in order to make their reproduction.  In fact, the set used by NOJ is the same set used in a Fischer-Spaasky rematch.
  • Because of the rarity of the original (50 known sets?), I suspect most sets sold today did not have access to an original set to create their reproduction.  Was it reproduced from images?  Perhaps it was reproduced from NOJ's (imitation is the greatest form of flattery, right?).  Or perhaps it was not intended to be a reproduction and is intended to be "inspired by" the original or is itself a derivative work.

NOJ also creates, a chess set called Dubrovnik II that was designed by Andrija Maurovic as a derivative work of the original Pocek design.  This is NOT a reproduction of Maurovic's design, rather it is an original as NOJ has permission from the copyright owner to make these chess sets and also uses Maurovic's original blueprints.  Anything else is just a an unauthorized copy.

As for what's called "Minceta"... I do not know who the original designer is.  I suspect this is just an "idea" as it incorporates elements from Pocek AND Maurovic's designs.  Hence, each Minceta set could be considered a derivative work... and there's no original to compare or debate the accuracy of.

Full disclosure... I own a Pocek reproduction and Maurovic designed set from NOJ because of the craftsmanship and historical significance.

If you were trying to buy a “Bobby Fischer Replica” - which NOJ set would you say is the one to choose?

AFAIK they say on their website it’s the Minceta

I’ve seen this video before (thank you for refresher) - but I can’t translate into NOJ. I take it to mean he likes the 1950 the best but I could be wrong

Yes it was , It's a shame that the Dubrovnik specialist no longer post on this forum , due to the bickering , that these set seem to conjure , some where on the forum is a post on the history of these set in The Balkans & the person who had the IP to the designs , it shame i can not find it as yet ? chess magazine, "Sahovski glasnik plays a big part in the selling of all things chess back then also chess sets too .

This post deals with who had the rights & how Noj started to make them , It go's into the history of how & why in a post war Balkans .

To be honest, I'm not sure how much reliance we can place on Fischer when it comes to the history and identification of the set. Leaving aside completely any of the issues with his mental state overall by the 1990s when he was talking about it, he wasn't in Dubrovnik in 1950 and didn't see the original set first-hand. He'll have known about it from probably the same descriptions and photos of the original set that we have now!

He may have had a bit of a better idea than we do thanks to proximity and discussions with people who were there, but can we have confidence that he could identify the differences between a Pocek, a Mauropovic and a Jakopovic? Can we be certain that the set he owned was actually a 1950, even if he thought it was?

His love of the set gives it a bit of stardust, certainly, and I'm not going to argue with his taste (for Dubrovniks, at least) but when it comes to treating him as an authority I'm inclined to take it with a pinch of salt.

No, he said it was his favorite set. And he is pictured, many times, with the later made set. He never said it was an original 1950 set that he owned. In fact the one he owned and is pictures with is the later version he bought in Zagreb, his words.

Great thread and a new hero in Brian...My Man!...Thanks.

To be perfectly candid,my decision to buy and Noj set had more to do with feeling I was getting the highest possible quality chess pieces on the market! I had enough confidence in the company to know their pieces would meet that expectation.

Once I had them in my hands, there was no doubt it was probably true.

A shout out to Eyechess for being such a fan of Noj back then. Btw,I hope you're feeling well,as I know you were under the weather a while back.

Nice to see you chime in now and then.

Strange , how the Dubrovnik chess set always falls back on the topic of Noj like it's the modern day grail at 1k + or Mr R J Fischer on what set he had or did not have ?

I would like to know more about other GM / IM who have used this set ,

Yes , we live in a world full of paradox's & contradictions , What make the Noj story even more strange is that Gregor had a 1950 Dubrovnik set & sold it as he likes , original Jaques chess sets , mind you so do I .

What about a slightly different take … bear with me.

What if we run with a hypothesis that whoever made the original 1950 pieces was a skilled craftsman in a local workshop.

That person makes a number of sets, 10, 20, 50 - pick a number. That’s the original 1950 batch.

To continue the hypothesis - of the original batch of sets - because they are handmade… the sets are ever so slightly different not much, but different nonetheless.

Then, over the years - those sets are used and loved and gifted …
… fast forward some years - 20 - 30 - 70 years…. Whatever.

Those 50 sets are now spread far and wide … remember, they are all the original sets from the same maker but with subtle differences.

And now when looked at with today’s exacting standards … one set is slightly different from another.

One person is adamant they have a rare original - passed down from a grandmaster. Another person has another set - passed down from another reputable source.

Both sets have unquestionable provenance to the original batch. Both are true originals.

Now… one set is given to one manufacturer and reproduced; - indeed, they are given ‘licence’ to produce the original. Similarly, another set is given to another manufacturer to reproduce… there are now two reproduction 1950’s originals - but both subtlety different bit produced from unquestioned originals.

We then find passionate argument for who’s is the most accurate. Maybe - under the hypothesis above - both are accurate.

Is that at all possible?… or have I just invented a hypothesis to make peace … I tend to think my hypothesis could be true … but please don’t abuse me too much ify idea is rubbish. It’s just a thought.

PS - I am not talking about different sets with different designs made at different times (e.g. a 50’s vs late ‘s vs ‘70’s) … I am suggesting that - in the one original 1950 batch … there were subtle differences that could then lead to different repro’s … but still true to the original.
🤔🥴

Powderdigit Mark that's one way to look at it i guess !

from part of a chat with Dubroman ,

while your set, and almost all originals have very sharp and defined lines. It is almost like replicas in real life look as though they are in 480p, and the originals are in 1080p:) This is because the originals were completely hand carved/turned without the use of power tools such as a dremel (hand held mill).

DesperateKingWalk Yes me too love the 1849 Jaques / Happy to have two sets one from 1865 & the other one from 1890 small club

Heresy!

But yes, this seems entirely possible, even probable. We know how difficult it is to produce exact replicas, especially when the pieces are carved by hand as the knights were. It seems likely to me that there were (unintentional) variations in the original design, and possible that some of these may even have fallen outside the tolerances of modern Dubrovnik experts when assessing replicas. Not at the level of overall proportions, obviously: the blanks should all be the same size, but some of the proportions on the carved features may have varied, to the extent that it will throw off the diagonal lines and the like when analysed. A difference of only a millimetre or two can make a fair difference.

When assessing how accurate a given reproduction is by comparing it to a photo of the original knight, we should remember that we're only comparing it to one knight of the 200 in the original series - and one of the production run for that matter, not a master copy - and that some of the other knights may well have differed slightly from the version we're referring to, with subsequent knock-on effects on later sets.

There's nothing we can do about that, of course, unless we can unearth all the original Dubrovnik sets and analyse them, which is utterly far-fetched, and we can only work with what we have.

In my opinion this is the best Dubrovnik ever made. It has no historical value(for now), but it's a brutally good playset. Something like a perfected Fischer's set. 
It is very similar to Fisher's, but it is:

- Bigger. The King is 95mm.

- Weighted

- and the king has a cross. This is + for me not because of religion, but because the king and queen are more different.

You can see in the video how the knights are carved in detail:

Suboseg You have some very nice Dubrovnik chess set's , I like you videos too , Can you help & shine some light on your wisdom & knowledge of theses set over the years as you are from The balkans & know way more than these members on here who keep going on about Noj etc & Fischer like it's some kind of lost mantra , Thank you

If you have any specific questions, feel free to ask, if I know the answer I will answer you.

Suboseg In one of your videos you have a set from the 60's , did you have this set for along time ? as it's in such good shape for most sets I have seen from that time have had a lot of hard knocks etc , also with the leather pads , Just to add it's such a elegant set .

Yes that is great set too, it was originaly gifted to the person who don't play chess. This is why it is in "just like new" condition.

That's a lucky find & very rare , Thank you for sharing , Do you have any more gems tucked away ?