Most expensive chess set

[Codexus]

I saw that on digg: http://most-expensive.net/chess-set

I think it's interesting to compare it with the most expensive japanese gobans. These chess sets are incredibly expensive because they are made of gold and diamonds. But a relatively simple wooden goban can be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.

So which one would you buy? ;)

[Supergrunch]

I have to say, fancy chess sets can be very nice, but I think I'd ultimately go for a nice go set for two reasons: I am a minimalist, so I think high quality wood looks a lot nicer than diamonds etc., and I play go whereas I don't play chess.

Still, I suppose expensive chess sets are nice trinkets to have around if you've got more money than you know what to do with.

[ScatCat]

I'm biased against the World's Most Expensive Ches set in two major ways. Firstly, like supergrunch, I prefer simplicity over ornate design. I guess that's why I like Japanese boards more than Chinese. Secondly Go is way more interesting than Chess. That's two strikes against the WMECS right there. :)

[simpkin]

I saw that on digg: http://most-expensive.net/chess-set

I think it's interesting to compare it with the most expensive japanese gobans. These chess sets are incredibly expensive because they are made of gold and diamonds. But a relatively simple wooden goban can be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.

So which one would you buy? ;)

That Charles Hollander chess set (http://www.charleshollandercollection.com/chess.html) isn't even terribly attractive, to my eye. Bling, without depth. The king they picture from the other set, the spiral gold thing, is rather more to my taste.

I have both a chess set and a Go set, and for various reasons both are travel sets, all of 25cm on the longer side. The Go set is the ordinary unexciting magnetic set (as seen at Payday Games (http://www.paydaygames.com/Cart/moreInfo.php?recordID=251)). The chess set, on the other hand, is a rather special hand-carved olive-wood set that I bought on Majorca when I was eight.

I don't play chess any more. I play Go a lot. And yet my chess set is pretty to the point of being a very nice (if undustable) ornament, and my Go set is prosaic to the point of boring.

I'm sure there's a moral in that somewhere ...

[phantom]

I'm not in a position to spend that kind of money on much of anything, but if someone offered to give me either the most expensive go set or the most expensive chess set on the condition that I'd never sell it, I'd take the go set in an instant. Since I have no interest in chess, I can't see the point in owning a really nice board.

Still, I have to admit that I think fancy chess sets can be cooler than comparably priced go sets. I love some of the themes that people come up with for chess sets and the intricate pieces they make. I really admire the creativity and craftsmanship that goes into a nice chess set. I guess there's just a lot you can do when you have to come up with unique designs for different pieces and when you don't have to make so many.

Personally, I really like this particular chess set. I think the people who designed it did an excellent job of using the diamonds to make it look elegant, rather than overly ornate, and I see a sort of simplicity in it. I guess the style of it just suits my tastes. I'm definitely a fan of white gold and diamonds.

Edit: The above comments refer to the diamond set. I didn't realize it wasn't the most expensive one at first. Are there more pictures of the ultra expensive one somewhere that I'm missing?

[Supergrunch]

I think it's worth pointing out that if I was going to buy an expensive chess set, I wouldn't choose this one. I'd pick a high quality marble set with traditionally carved pieces, which is in keeping with my aesthetics.

[ChiyoDad]

I think it's worth pointing out that if I was going to buy an expensive chess set, I wouldn't choose this one. I'd pick a high quality marble set with traditionally carved pieces, which is in keeping with my aesthetics.
Likewise. An authentically hand-carved Isle of Lewis set (http://www.chesscentral.com/sets-pieces-chess/isle-lewis-chess-set.htm) would be more to my taste.

[simpkin]

Edit: The above comments refer to the diamond set. I didn't realize it wasn't the most expensive one at first. Are there more pictures of the ultra expensive one somewhere that I'm missing?

Not that I can find. Best guess: they're saving them for big publicity pushes and things. The website about the set makes it clear they're looking for big corporate sponsors and stuff.

[Bantari]

I saw that on digg: http://most-expensive.net/chess-set

I think it's interesting to compare it with the most expensive japanese gobans. These chess sets are incredibly expensive because they are made of gold and diamonds. But a relatively simple wooden goban can be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.

So which one would you buy? ;)

Honestly - neither! :)

If I had enough money to spend that much without making a dent in my fortune (which is the only situation in which I would even consider making such purchase) - I would rather save a medium-size african country from starvation. Or do something else which would actually make a positive difference to somebody somewhere who needs help.

Having yet another chess or Go set sitting in my room, no matter how expensive, would not make any difference for me or for nobody else (other than maybe the seller whou would but a nice house for my money.) ;)

[Nate]

I'd have to say none of the above. Even if I happened to be absurdly rich, I don't think I would choose to spend my money this way.

[zinger]

For $500,000, I think I would go for a high quality hardwood chess set, a kaya/shell/mulberry Go set, a fancy gammon set while I'm at it, plus a new house, and maybe a Ferrari. Call me kooky.

[malweth]

Around here, $500,000 would be just enough for a moderate sized house. (Though having no mortgage payment would be pretty awesome).

If I had that choice, I agree... I wouldn't want either of them. I'd rather see $500,000 worth of go sets be donated to schools & clubs.

[Supergrunch]

Everyone is so altruistic here. :) I admit a diamond chess set (or even a nice marble one) would be very low on my list of priorities, but I would really like a high(ish) quality floor goban and 9.5mm (or thereabouts) yuki stones and some nice bowls. Then I'd go on to spend my money on other people who need it. :p

[funkyj]

I have to say, fancy chess sets can be very nice, but I think I'd ultimately go for a nice go set for two reasons: I am a minimalist, so I think high quality wood looks a lot nicer than diamonds etc., and I play go whereas I don't play chess.

Still, I suppose expensive chess sets are nice trinkets to have around if you've got more money than you know what to do with.

Sort of in sync with you minimalist theme, I don't like non-standard piece designs where I might forget which piece is which. If I was going to have some one build me a million dollar chess set they would have to shape the pieces very closely to the standard Staunton pieces. Embellishment would be OK but an chess player had better be able to recognize each piece in his sleep.

Not that I play chess anymore ...

[Dru Lee Parsec]

The thing with fancy chess sets is that they distract me from the game. I look at a set as a set of pieces that I use to play the game as opposed to a collectible. My favorite set is this House of Staunton set:
Reykjavik '72 Series (http://www.houseofstaunton.com/HOS/ReykjavikBlackVin.html)

For Go I only have one set, the Samarkand club set. Although I'd like to have a nicer table set or even a floor board if I played more often.

Now, having said that I don't look at chess sets as collectibles I look around this room and count 7 different chess sets. Only 3 of which I actually use. Oddly enough, the ones I use the most are my plastic tournament set and my plastic mini analysis set. The House of Staunton set stays in the box.