“Chess to the People!”
— Anonymous

The extraordinary Staunton design of chess pieces very quickly became a favorite set among strong players who took chess more seriously than a simple game. It was indeed cheaper to produce than competing chess set design variants that dominated until the mid-nineteenth century. But just because it was cheaper to produce, doesn’t mean it was cheaper for chess fans. Still, it was a heyday of capitalism!

John Jacques, of course, did his best to make his design exclusive in the world of chess, and therefore expensive. Jacques sets had a signature and number, they came in luxury mahogany boxes and were marked with Jacques’ stamp:

Even today, pieces from the John Jacques manufacture are luxury goods. These pieces are the first in their new Millennium series 1850, produced in the year 2000. in just 60 copies. These are full Club-size chess pieces of the original design with a 4-3/8″ King having a 1-7/8″ diameter base, just like their original sets.

Beautiful and exclusive, the Staunton set was equally inaccessible to chess fans without great ambitions, as well as the complicated and expensive sets of Thomas Lund, Samuel Fisher and George Merrifield. But that shape was so appealing that many wanted it. This is exactly what opened the space for competition to Jacques' company. And a competitor with a much lower price of its sets, appeared in France in 1890.

That year, the company “Lardy Echecs” (later “Lardy International”) was founded in Dortan near Oyonnax, France, which began, like today’s Chinese manufacturers, to make cheap copies of Staunton designs. As can be seen from the proto-design, the pieces are created so that, without a doubt, they are very similar to the basic Staunton shape:

Cheap Lardy sets quickly began to gain popularity on the European and American continents, primarily due to the significantly lower price compared to the original. How did Lardy manage to lower the price of the figures? Of course, by lowering production costs.

The most intricate piece, which also decisively influences the price of the set, is certainly the Knight. It was not possible to do it by machine at that time, so each Knight had to be carved by hand. That is why the first Lardy sets were characterized by – different Knights!

Features

The players didn’t mind. For the game, Lardy’s sets were very practical, so this design was quickly adopted by other manufacturers. In America, this design was commercialized by the companies Cavalier, Lowe, Drueke, Sterling and many others. Thus, in the United States, this set became known as “North American Staunton”. Until World War II, the proportions between pieces in the sets varied. For example, the Bishop was generally proportionally smaller than in Staunton sets, and in the so-called Lardy club set, the Knight was disproportionately large:

Another feature of Lardy’s sets was the so-called A ‘French Bishop’, whose mitre was conical in shape and ended in a ‘french beret’ finial instead of a small ball:

Early Queen versions had a recess with a ball under the coronet, and later there was a version with a bulge and a ball above the coronet, as in the classic Staunton sets.

After World War II, the form was finally standardized, and Lardy Staunton sets – from the 60’s onward – are easily distinguished by the typical blocky knights head – a flat horizontal top line with a small jutting rear fin – strong striatures on head and neck for better sets, as well as bulging wooden eyes. This characteristic shape became the company logo:

The world chess organization FIDE made this set official for the tournament play, and it was Lardy’s sets official at the 21st Chess Olympics in Nice in 1974.

However, the plastic set that appeared after the war immortalized the early draft of Lardy’s set with a recess on the top of the Queen and proportionally smaller Bishops. This set is ubiquitous today, dirt cheap, and in addition to the name French Lardy set and North American Staunton, it can also be found under the name FIDE Classic and Club Special.

Wooden or plastic set?

There is no serious chess player in the world today who did not have a Lardy set on the board in front of him, such as the one from 1970:

Here is young Garry Kasparov at the 1981 tournament in Tilburg with Lardy’s set in front of him:

Robert Fischer prepares with Lardy’s set:

Lev Polugaevsky, USSR grandmaster in the opening round of the Hoogovens tournament at Beverwijk, 12th January 1966.

Here’s Mark, the Chess Cat:

Here’s Beth Harmon:

And here’s true Beth Harmon – Grandmaster Judith Polgar:

If you can choose between plastic and wooden sets, be sure to choose wooden:

Copies

The company “Lardy International” ceased to exist in 1992, after 102 years chess popularization. The name will last for a long time through their sets, but the greatest compliment they got after the others started copying their design!

Plastic set, which is mass-produced in China today, will undoubtedly be the cheapest and most suitable for children, because you can easily replace lost pieces. The only personal objection I have to this set are the proportions:

In my opinion, paњns are elegant, but their base has relatively small diameter. Besides, in my humble opinion, they should not be below half the height of the King. The Bishop and the Rook are reduced in relation to the classic Staunton proportions, which in a practical game adversely affects the ease of overview on the board. Of course, personal impressions vary, so you may not mind. I also have a complaint about the reduced base diameter of the Bishop in relation to the base diameter of the Knight. They should be at least equal.

Despite these objections, this plastic set is easy to manipulate, the masters would say “it is good at hand”. It is stable enough for all types of games including blitz. If it could be good enough for Beth Harmon, it probably will probably be good for you too 😉

On the other hand, if you are still not satisfied with it, Ukraine, Poland, Germany, India, and even the competing French company Chavet, sell very good and relatively cheap wooden interpretations of Lardy designs, made of boxwood, maple, rosewood and ebony:

When choosing a set, you must know how to choose according to the purpose. If you are a fan of enjoying the game, you will choose wooden sets and classic shapes. If you travel and analyze a lot as a chess player, you will need light and stable pieces that will not be a burden in your luggage. If you play hard blitz games, a plastic set with stable pieces that are easily picked and easily manipulated will suit best. Here is an example of the differences between the classic plastic Lardy set and the wooden Indian interpretation.

Today, India is one of the largest producers of chess pieces and they have several variants of Lardy design. I have owned one of these wooden Indian sets for a long time. At first glance, the resemblance to Lardѕ’s set is striking in all the pieces except one… Almost all the small objections that I previously made to the shape of the plastic set have been corrected. For example, the proportions of the pieces were corrected in the direction of the remarks: The pawn was slightly increased, and the diameter of the base was increased by as much as 5 millimeters.

The Bishop and the Rook are proportionally enlarged, so the whole set looks more harmonious than the plastic Lardy, however…

The opportunity to make an extraordinary set was missed on the Knight. It deviates significantly from Lardy design. From the profile, it looks more like a rabid bully tiger than a horse’s head, but that is not a special problem. The much bigger problem is that the wooden Knight is – fat!

This shape does not allow a secure grip in blitz games, and that is a real shame. If the Knight was better carved, this set would deserve all the recommendations. This way, you will have to opt for a wooden Indian set if you play casual chess (without a time limit) with friends, and for a plastic one if you like to play blitz games.

The plastic, weighted and unweighted Lardy pieces meet all the standards of the tournament game, are great for the younger categories and analyzes, and very good for blitz games. They would probably be the best in the universal use category, if the ‘Dubrovnik’ set had not appeared in 1950…

Following in the next part: Dubrovnik set