Worst chess set design ever?

What, in your opinion, is the worst designed chess set ever? Photos are a bonus!

My entry? Any modern "all glass" set of course...

I think the glass sets you see at say harbor freight are beautiful.  I don't know if they're easy on the eyes/playable, but a beautiful decoration.  

I have a pretty strong hate for the "Best Chessmen Ever" nonsense, but the cream of the crop of ugly pieces is the "collared" version of them.  The "foreskin" bishop is just stunning.

I know there are a lot of people in this forum that like the BCE pieces.  I'm just (decidedly) not one of them.

Well, the bishop on my BCE set does not look like that at all.  My set looks like this except it has the stainless steel bottoms on it:

Yeah, they have lots of variations on the design.  Guess they couldn't decide which one was the bestest.

That's one happy horse!

I claim first prize with this disgusting chess set

I'm with OMGChess14, the arrogantly named "Best Chessmen Ever" are the most revolting sets I've ever seen.

I think the reason they are so spectacularly loathsome is that they look a bit like the Staunton pattern - but it's like they're perverted somehow. It's like when you see a photo of a person's face that has been messed about with so it no longer looks quite human - the result is revolting.

And yet, you KNOW those balloon-head bishops ARE ugly (even though you can't objectively prove it).

Go on, say it! Say they're ugly - you will find it strangely liberating

The standard Staunton design, put forth by Jaques since 1849, became the standard of tournament chess sets, whether we like it or not. 

That basic design has been used, modified and presented in a number of different ways over the years.  So, what many people claim is ugly is usually something other than the Staunton design.

I don't like round bishop heads.  Yes, I think they are balloonish, there I said it.

I have to say I don't like some Knight designs.  One example is the dog looking Knights of some of the Spanish sets, and I'm half Spanish descent.

I think the vast majority of chess pieces fall under the category of,...blah, boring, in the middle.  They are not necessarily great looking and they don't look that great either.

There used to be a poster on this forum that hated all Eastern European set designs, particularly with the opposite colored finials and no miter cut in the Bishop, and also no cross on the King.  Meh, everyone likes what they like and doesn't like what they don't like.

But for objective ugly, I think that SonOfThunder2 has nailed it above.

I'll gladly take it if it's made of ivory.

Hello!

SonOfThunder2

2Q1C

Art chess is too separate topic.
Let discuss sets designed for use, but not for an exhibition.

My opinion, the first place is occupied by the Polish set, where the queen is like a jester or cauliflower.

Agree, I don't even consider those things chess sets.  A bunch of nuts and bolts?  Come on.  No.  I'm only considering chess sets that are actually possible to use in an actual chess game (reasonably staunton-esque at minimum).  And BCE is the worst of that bunch imo.

I must say, in the eastern countries there is a good perception of this design. We do not call  the bishop  this piece, we don't need to see miter. This is an "officer" or "vizier", or even an "elephant".

It looks like an advanced pawn  .  

I'm curious.  Have you actually seen a Best Chessmen Ever set in real life, or have you only looked at pictures?

And are you differentiating between the Stage 1, which is the original design without collars, and the Stage 2 with collars?

Yes, and yes.  I get that you like them.  I don't.  That's ok.

Oh, this is certainly not my favorite set.  My friend that I play 1 - 2 hours a week with likes this set the best.

I'm just looking at this set in light of this thread.  In my opinion, I don't think it is the worst designed, playable set out there.  Now, if my set did not have the stainless steel bottoms, I wouldn't think that much of it or its design.

I owned this set for a very short time:

Now, this is an ugly set.  Doesn't it look like some awkward teenager?  And it does not play well at all, in my opinion.

For another, look at this one:

This was the first wood set I bought and I'm here to tell you those Knights are like bad stumps of wood, both in looks and handling.  This is ugly, my friend.

I'll give you that the picture of a few of the Best Chessmen Ever sets are also pretty darned ugly.  I find I am grabbing other sets to bring to play with instead of mine.  But during a game, my Stage 2 with the stainless bases isn't noticeably bad at all.

We need to start another thread, which I will do right after this, about what sets we like the best as far as looks, or which is the best not worst.

And, I'm okay with you not liking the Best Chessmen Ever sets.

Just a difference of opinion.  I would use either of the two sets you just posted WAY before I would use any BCE set.

Eyechess, yes the knight in the first pic does look like an awkward teenager. The knight is the 2nd pic looks a bit portly.