Comments by "GH1618" (@GH-oi2jf) on "Why Championship Chess Sets Are So Expensive | So Expensive" video.

  1. She is not clear in the video, but she is referring to the Staunton design generally, not to the small details in a particular set. Standardization of chessmen in the Staunton design does improve the play, which is why it is used everywhere for serious chess.
    2
  2. You don’t have much imagination, then.
    2
  3. She was referring to the Staunton design generally, not the fine details that distinguish the championship pieces. The Staunton design, whether carved by hand or molded in plastic, was an important improvement in the game. Standardization frees the mind to concentrate only on the play, because recognition of the pieces is automatic.
    2
  4. The reason they don’t need to look at the pieces is because of the standardization of the Staunton design.
    1
  5. Check House of Staunton.
    1
  6. “One complete tree”? No. One small piece of a tree to make a chess piece.
    1
  7. More labor than an ordinary set.
    1
  8. It isn’t BS. She didn’t make it clear, but she was referring to the Staunton design generally, not to the fine details of a particular variation. The Staunton design was intended to make it asy to distinguish the pieces at a glance, and to work well in practice. It has become the standard because it works well.
    1
  9. What does such a machine cost?
    1
  10. That’s what they are.
    1
  11. You are a wrong there. Tournaments are not going to be played without a board.
    1
  12. No doubt they also make ordinary professional quality sets which are produced in larger numbers.
    1
  13. The championship set? If a set of comparable quality could be made for less, somebody would do it. Hand craftsmanship is not cheap.
    1
  14. It is because of the standardization of the Staunton design that chess players need not pay attention to the design of the pieces.
    1
  15. Not many sets are needed for championship tournaments. Wood is the best material for chessmen. It just has the right feel, and the weight can be adjusted so they are bottom-heavy.
    1
  16. You couldn’t play serious chess that way. A breeze might disrupt the board. Even a sneeze. If you were in prison, you might make a set like that out of necessity.
    1
  17. Compared to whom? No doubt less than workers in the industrialized west, but maybe well enough compared to handcraft workers in India.
    1
  18. Having standardized relationships among the pieces is an aid to recognition, along with the other design details. Play with any Staunton design and no effort at all is required to familiarize yourself with the pieces.
    1
  19. The Staunton design was introduced by John Jaques in 1849. The elements of the design are what matter. All the countless variations in details of the Staunton design are unimportant. What is important is that for a tournament all of the sets be of proper size and weight and indistinguishable from one another.
    1
  20. I’m sure the people who play championship-level chess also play on ordinary sets now and then.
    1
  21. What does a suitable machine cost? How many precision sets do they make in a year?
    1
  22. I’ll bet these workers are glad to have the job.
    1
  23. Not with the same precision and consistency.
    1
  24. The artisan is probably making ordinary chess pieces at first, then working up to certification to make championship sets. In Japan, it takes five years for an apprentice to learn to make the rice for sushi. Not surprising that it takes so long.
    1
  25. Not at all, thanks to the standardization of the Staunton design. That was the point of it.
    1
  26. How many professional quality chess sets do they sell in a year? Would it be worth the investment? They would still have to hire people to operate the machines.
    1
  27. No doubt, but chessmen are not machinery and don’t need the precision of machinery. The necessary precision is just that which makes all sets in a tournament indistinguishable from one another.
    1
  28. That is not what she said.
    1
  29. The Staunton design has lasted 170 years because it is a good design. It has been the standard for a long time. I expect it will last 170 more years and then some.
    1
  30. Wrong. One of the advantages of the Staunton design over earlier designs was that the pieces were more stable. You don’t want the pieces to be knocked over accidentally in a game. Look and feel is important in chess sets as in a lot of things.
    1
  31. They can afford to use nice sets for tournaments.
    1
  32. Are they weighted?
    1
  33. They want consistency. In a championship tournament, all the sets will be indistinguishable from one another, so moving from one set to another will not cause the least distraction. Chess players are tempermental.
    1
  34. Measurement.
    1
  35. Perhaps the term has fallen out of favor because some people think the term implies the male sex only. It does not.
    1
  36. A lathe is a machine but the chisel is a hand tool. These sets are properly called “hand-made.”
    1
  37. The number of championship sets produced is too small for that to be economic.
    1
  38. Some people spend a lot more. Professionals will pay $500 for tournament sets to get consistency and quality.
    1
  39. If they get too expensive, they could be produced by a machine. Probably the number of championship sets is too low to make machining economic.
    1
  40. “Championship sets” are used for the world championship matches.
    1
  41. It doesn’t, but it is important that the pieces have proper relative heights.
    1