The ones that are used here in the US seem to be a good size. I do not have any problems focusing on the board.
You can always check the "Books & Equipment" section of the Chess.com site to see if you can find a board which you like.
Standard chess-matts too big
Sort:
You consider 2 inch squares too big? In the US, tournament rules say that the squares have to be between 2 and 2.5 inch, and the standard roll up boards that most people use have 2.25 inch squares. I have a roll up board with 2 inch squares that I prefer, because it is easier to take in the whole board at once, and I've actually had opponents complain that it's too small!
--Fromper
Upto 2.5 inches! Here was me thinking that 2 inches was too big. Like many people, I started playing chess at around seven years of age with a run-of-the mill chess set that you would get in a high street store - the squares were about an inch; then later played on chess computers with squares of similar size, and so I got used to this. I simply find standard competition chess matts as used in tournaments (so this is not down to a board that I want...) too large.
If you happen to be, however, someone that was taught to play chess from say four or five years of age, which of course does happen, then the size of board doesn't matter.
I don't think I've ever actually seen 2.5 inch squares. I just know it's allowed under tournament rules. Almost everyone in the US seems to have the same 2.25 inch boards. I can't imagine how kids handle it. I prefer 2 inch squares as an adult, because I can take in the whole board and I'm less likely to overlook things.
Since most of my tournament games are slow games, and I do get restless (I think I have ADD), I tend to stand up during my games and look at the board from a few feet away at least a couple of times per game. I heard Fischer used to walk around the board sometimes to see the game from his opponent's side. I've done that once or twice, but I should probably do it more often, to improve my defensive play by looking at things that my opponent is trying to do.
--Fromper
Right, I've since found out that even in the UK standard chess matts are infact 2.25 inches and not 2 inches (I've never actually measured them myself...), so even bigger than what I thought. The thing is, that many semi professional players; never mind full time professional players, have been taught to play chess from a very early age, typically 4-5 yrs (which is a big difference from starting at 7-8 years of age), so providing they have some natural aptitude, by the time they get to say 10+ years of age, they are so strong with the basics of the game that it doesn't matter to them what size of board they are playing on, but it does matter to more mortal players who need to be able to get a snapshot of the whole board from one move to the next.
Now, once I did get up and walk around like Bobby Fischer when I was 18 playing against a kid of 6 in some event who played like a machine - he barely glanced at the board before moving; and I was told that this was unfair gamesmanship.
Now, once I did get up and walk around like Bobby Fischer when I was 18 playing against a kid of 6 in some event who played like a machine - he barely glanced at the board before moving; and I was told that this was unfair gamesmanship.
Fromper wrote:
...US, tournament rules say that the squares have to be between 2 and 2.5 inch...
--Fromper
This is good to know. I just ordered a 21.5" (2.5" squares) roll-up vinyl chessboard and it never occured to me that it might not be within regulation specs. By the bye, are 3 5/8" kings permitted in regulation tournament and club play in the U.S.???
Jun 7, 2018
0
#9
A-Jenery wrote:
I don't know if the following is true for all parts of the world, but in the U.K, competition chess-matts are allways of the same 'extra large' format (at least for all the pro-am tournaments I have ever taken part in - which is not that many), where each square is 2-inches.
My personal view is that they are too big; I find it very difficult to focus on the entire board, and personally think that it is impossible to do so without standing on the chair, something I would never do of course... The result has often been that I have made elementary mistakes that I'm sure I would never had made with a normal sized matt/board. I'm wondering what other players think on this? Are standard competition chess-matts too big; about right, etc."
That's regulation tournament size and that's what you want to get used to, and always play on, and use Staunton pieces too. This is the sort of tournament set you will be using when you want to get a rating so get comfortable with it.
Jun 7, 2018
0
#10
How did you find this old thread to resurrect it? The OP was last here 10 years ago.
I only clicked on it because I saw the words "Matt's too big" and thought - yes I need to lose a few pounds, but how did they know?
This is a top Google result for searches along the lines of chess set too big. I think a lot of us beginners are surprised just how big tournament sets are, they seem almost like a novelty toy, like jumbo chess set. It is nice being able to grab the huge pieces in your hands though, instead of daintily picking tiny pieces up between your fingers.
I don't know if the following is true for all parts of the world, but in the U.K, competition chess-matts are allways of the same 'extra large' format (at least for all the pro-am tournaments I have ever taken part in - which is not that many), where each square is 2-inches.
My personal view is that they are too big; I find it very difficult to focus on the entire board, and personally think that it is impossible to do so without standing on the chair, something I would never do of course... The result has often been that I have made elementary mistakes that I'm sure I would never had made with a normal sized matt/board. I'm wondering what other players think on this? Are standard competition chess-matts too big; about right, etc.