Tom Watson wrote in message . ..
On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 19:48:25 GMT, Jim Wilson
wrote:


This size relationship between the pieces and the boards results in a
crowded board, in my opinion. It is certainly not the worst I have seen
(I think those Mexican agate sets would win that prize), but it is
quite a bit more crowded than standard competition sets and boards. These
typically have a King base diameter between 69% and 74% of the square
width.

I would also note that the fixed 1/8" buffer is probably an ok variance
for regular sized boards, but that it makes better sense to use a larger
variance for larger sets. I don't imagine a 1/8" larger square size would
be noticeable at all in a lawn or park set.


I was curious to see what the USCF rules might say about this and
found the following in the Fifth Edition, published in 2003:

From Section 41C. Proportions.:

"The guidelines for determining the proper square size for a Staunton
chess set is that the King should occupy around 78 percent of the
square. An acceptable square size may be up to 1/8 inch larger than
this number, but not smaller."

Fussy l'il debils, ain't dey.


Doing the algebra I see that if the base of the king occupies 78%
of the square the diameter of the base of the king is equal
to the length of one side of the square. Now, it seems to me that
just coming out and saying that the diameter of the base of the king
should be no more one eight of an inch smaller than the side of
a square is more straightforward so I wonder if the folks at the USCF
have a funky notion of what it means to 'occupy' some partion of a
square.

--

FF