There is a gentleman in our local club who owns, and often plays with, a somewhat unusual set. Although the style and size of the pieces appear to be conventional Staunton (and in those respects legal), the color of the pieces is unusual.
Instead of clearly White and Black, they are a dark tan (light brown) and a dark brown. The two colors are indeed different, but not as clearly as they would be if they were White and Black.
I haven’t played this gentelman yet, but probably will soon. And I haven’t noticed anyone complain about the reduced contrast between the White and Black in his set - although it might have happened, more discreetly (as would be appropriate). In any event, I am a bit uneasy about playing with this set - knowing that perhaps my own ability to detect clearly the contrast might be less than some others’. (20/20, but missing some minor degree of color recognition ability, I’ve been told.)
Anyway - are there any guidelines about this kind of thing, specifically, the required range of color(s) or color contrast of the pieces? I suspect it’s not an easy thing to quantify or define. I am inclined to ask that this set NOT be used, but I don’t want to cause a problem if this is already a clear-cut issue (in either direction).
Thanks for any feedback or insights that can be provided on this issue (which I know is relatively minor).
Yeah, that’s what I figured was the default - I guess I was just looking for the least confrontational approach, so wondered what precedents there might be for this kind of request. I suspect I am atypical in this particular eyesight deficiency.
I am not so much worried about being able to discern the White Knight from the Black Knight, if they are sitting on a table top next to each other, as I am worried about losing sight of the fact that it’s my OPPONENT’s Knight sitting on g5, not mine, as I’m contemplating my next move.
Probably it is an unplaced phobia, and I agree with your “bottom line” approach.
Hey - maybe I should try some of Jen Shahade’s unicolor chess, as a special training aid!
Thanks, all, for your feedback (and any other ideas that follow). Xplor, I like your idea!.. heading off to Staples in a few minutes. :mrgreen:
When playing someone with an expensive set that the owner values I mention my fear of damaging one of the pieces and request to use the low cost USCF approved set that is in the bag, but only after admiring their fine chess set.
At one scholastic tournament the organizer had white and green instead of white and black. It was a St. Patrick’s Day tournament and he did have black pieces available if anybody wanted to change (nobody did).
Last weekend one player had red and blue, with blue used for the black pieces.
I once had to teach “queen on her own color” to someone with a white and red set on a red and black board. In this case red is light and red is black while confusion reigned.
Some of the color combos I’ve seen at scholastic tournaments are enough to give any sane adult a migraine. Neon pink and green on an orange board! Ewwwwww!!!
With the properly tinted and polarized sunglasses, though, you could probably make a set look more ‘standard’, though. Or any combination of shades.
Plus, bonus: If they are dark enough and/or mirrored, one could look as cool as a professional poker player! :mrgreen:
[size=85]Disclosure: The author of this post does not advocate a rules change that all players should be required to possess tinted sunglasses. Nor does he really believe that wearing sungasses should be legal in professional poker.[/size]