Dubrovnik chess set playing experience

Hello guys,

I want to buy a chess set (one and only ever!!!) and I'm stuck between Dubrovnik 1950 original and Dubrovnik II (Noj). The more I read the info already posted here and the BCE site I conclude that the original 1950 set is better. I'm planning to use it for analysis and playing (mainly blitz). Can anyone with first hand experience help?

Many thanks in advance for your help.

I think Zagreb style Dubrovnik is better than the ones you mentioned because the knight has a defined neck while Dubrovnik I and II have knights whose neck is connected to its chest which makes the knight looks kind of crude.

Uh, oh!

I own both of these. I strongly prefer the Noj Dubrovnik 1950 over the Noj Dubrovnik II. Personally, I think the original design is more aesthetically pleasing, and the later version feels a little corrupted compared to the original. But these are minor differences, and in the end, it's your call whether you feel the subtle design differences warrant the substantially higher price.

What is the Dubrovnik experience?

I can see the visual appeal of the pieces, although to my Staunton trained eye, they still look a bit weird.

But Fischer talked about his D II like God made it. So I'm assuming the pieces have a great feel as well as good looks.

What does a Dubrovnik feel like?

I have the Noj Dubrovnik II.  The set plays nicely.  The pieces have a nice shape to them when playing on the board.

On a lot of sets, the pieces are kind of thick and fuller.  This set has more finer details.  The pieces fit in the grip nicely and feel nice.  It is kind of hard to explain.  The HoS Player Series is like this even though it is a Staunton design.

Not too long ago, I read on this forum a person mentioning how nice the HoS Dubrovnik plays.  And a lot of people on this forum tell of how much they like the CB Dubrovnik sets.  So, there might just be something about the size and design of the pieces that make it so nice to play with.

The Fischer Spassky and the Marshall, Proline, Championship, Lardy sets don't have this "tiny" feel.

I don't know, it's kind of fun the way the pieces feel in the hand when moving them.

Eyechess: I assume it's something like you say and I appreciate your effort to explain the unexplainable.

Here's a crazy Youtube of a guy laying out his Dubrovnik pieces, basking in the view, caressing the pieces occasionally and tapping them to show their stability, all to the Blue Danube, like you're watching the spaceship docking with the space station in Kubrick's 2001.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_ArgBGcCag

Thanks for the video recommendation, ipcress. Made me laugh. What a crazy (yet harmless!) occupation chess-piece fetishism is. I wish this guy the best of luck though, he's clearly got a great sense of humour, or he knows where to find the beauty in every day things.

IMHO, nothing to do with the pieces...

I have a lot of sets and I can't notice the pieces when I'm focused in the game or the analysis. Even, I can recall some games but I couldn't say what set I was using for it.

For me a specific chess set is just for collection and feeling. So... take a stable set that means something for you and don't worry too much for the pieces. Both sets are very good.

If you are gonna blitz in the park I would recommend plastic due to the abuse (although I use a CB dubrovnik). Otherwise, for analysis and blitz I think both sets are good. I rather buy the Dubro II, for me it is more pleasant.

What part of Spain are you? I'm from Alcorcon and I usually play in the park or the club with some guys ... I wouldn't reject a park game with a dubro :)

Keeping it simple. The " Dubrovnik II remake by Noj is the set Bobby Fischer actually owned and practiced with " that you see in the many various videos and pics of him with his set around the net. The Dubrovnik I 1950 remake by Noj is the set that was actually played in the tournament. Either one are fine sets. Our selection choice was the Dubrovnik II in maple and walnut as it related more to the famous 1972 Fischer Spassky era which we centralize our collection around. It plays extemely well and surely those that own either one or even both will certainly agree. 

Thank you guys for a wonderfull input.  

However there are things that remain unclear.  There is a difference in size of the pieces and Dubrovnik II has a 2 mm wider base.  

Also Noj offers an option to buy it weighted or unweighted.

Does anyone know how these changes affect stability of the pieces (specially in a rapid game)?

Fonta: As I recall Fischer liked his Dubrovnik unweighted and he was a helluva blitz player and fairly ferocious with his pieces when just analyzing.

I've never played with a D set, so I wouldn't know. I like the feeling of heft in a weighted set, but maybe I could learn different.

Though I am not a collector but my favorite overall Dubrovnik set is my stained crimson Dubrovnik chess set from chessbazaar. The set plays wonderfully with wide bases with great balance and feel. I think the best thing about this set is it's horse, which looks really elegant in that stained crimson color. I've never seen this kind of finnish on chess sets before. As I have said before, I am not a collector and play with the sets I buy and own.  So, my favorites are ones that I and my friends like the best to play with.

http://www.chessbazaar.com/catalogsearch/result/?cat=0&q=dubrovnik+chess+set

Two weeks ago, I bought the Dubrovnik 1950 at NOJ. In the shop I could observe an original Dubrobnik 1950 from the tournament. These pieces are unweighted but also stable. My pieces are weighted and it feels good, to play with them. Mr. Nowak told me, that some customers from USA ordered unweighted sets. But after a few weeks they send it back to him for putting weights into the pieces. Further he told me, that the majority of the sets will be ordered with weighted pieces.

Bobby Fischer used his (unweighted) set for analysis and for travelling. So it will be an advantage, to have a light weighted set for travelling by plane.

The fact that the NOJ weighted pieces are all weighted by the same amount ensures that the Dubrovnik sets have an authentic 'feel' to the original unweighted sets, only a little heavier. In addition there seems to be a prevalent view here in the USA that equates the weight of chess pieces to their quality.

Mac I have to agree with you on the weight thing. Some think the heavier the set the better which couldn't be more wrong in my opinion. Some sets get so heavy the pieces feel really weird to lift and move. I like a set with some weight but not noticable heavy. Unfortunately many of the chess set buyers are demanding heavy sets.  It's the mind set heavier is better and it seems of lately that bigger is better. I myself do not want to buy a set over 4.4" and like sets in betwixt 3.75" to 4.25". Just my opinion.