Reproduction and Real Jaques of London Chess Set

forked_again : Please recall that the video you reference discusses club-size sets (4.4" kings) and AD states that there are only five known of that type.  HOWEVER, after that video was published I acquired a 4.4" 1849 set with hand-signed label.  The other five I own are all 3.5" sets.  I have posted pictures of them on this forum and on the FB pages.  Including ivory sets, and 3.5" sets there must be at least 100+ examples of original 1849 sets in existence.  Alan Fersht has a page of albums documenting several dozen sets with hand-signed labels.  

Very interesting thank you.

Are all the bishops balls (excuse my language) broken off?  

Yes, there were broken - thankfully one loose fragment was in the box so I could have the others restored to match.  

TRUE!! But back in 1849 I serious doubt that a set of pieces cost as much as they do today (even adjusting for inflation). Just because Jaques crammed his pieces into a tiny little undivided box does not mean that a company that takes pride in producing a "genuine (though as we have seen even that statement can not be held to be necessarily true) 1849" set should take enough pride in their workmanship to not copy a trashy little box just because "Jaques did it" -- that is taking this "reproduction"  stupidity to a whole other level.  Even Jaques TODAY sells *their* own 1849 reproduction packed in a coffer.  Even the HoS provides a LARGE Divided box to store *their* pieces in, and they to to extreme lengths to replicate the 1849 set down to the individual green stickers on the bottom of pieces!! They also provide the little green paper sticker that would be found on the inside of the lid... that and they also provide a brass plate you could choose to apply with its own registration number.  Could you upgrade the box to a coffer?!?  I don't know however when I bought my Luxury Collector Series -- a set based on the Early 1849-1850 sets with refinements -- in Boxwood and Rosewood I was given a chance to upgrade the box to a coffer at no charge. It came with the Brass Plate, Registration Number, and all the bells and whistles of a LUXURY set!!

Divide in two compartments? Why would one want that? I take that dividing panel out from my boxes if possible. It just takes space and makes trouble when taking the pieces out.

-Izmet Fekali

My point exactly!! How can you tell what is an exact reproduction of the 1849 set?!? One company is making TWO sets that they are claiming are 1849 "REPRODUCTIONS. You have two options: 1) Buy from a company that is nit picking in details such as The House of Staunton, or 2) Buy a set that is INSPIRED and Based upon the 1849-1950 sets. A set that I would buy today would be HoS Exotique Collection -- Imperial Collector Series 4.4" King or 4.0" King -- a BEAUTIFUL set w/exotic woods.  Me IF I were to buy another set this time with a 4.4 inch King this would be the set I would buy, not the "1849 Reporduction, since not all 1849 "reproductions" are created equal... though IF I were to go that route I'd buiy the HoS version (Why? How many companies other HoS put REPRODUCTIONS of the little green stickers found on the bottom of the ORIGINAL 1849 set?? The Answer: ZERO!!

 Thank you!!! That was VERY informative. So the BIG question becomes WHAT constitutes a "GENUINE" 1849 Reproduction?!?  IF there was that much variation between the ORIGINAL 1849 sets, then ANYONE today can CLAIM that the sets they are selling are "GENUINE 1849 REPRODUCTIONS". UNIFORMITY should be the objective otherwise how can someone CLAIM that it is a "REPRODUCTION"? Even a poorly turned and carved set could be considered an 1849 "Reproduction" based upon your statement. In this day and age of computers and CAD programs using both images from ORIGINAL 1849 sets as well as Cooke's ORIGINAL drawings, a STANDARD of what constitutes an "1849" Reproduction should be devised.

The more I hear about the extreme variations in supposed "1849 "Reproductions" the more appeal a lot of the modern sets that were INSPIRED some of these early Jaques set (1849-1860) have. 

I think the HOS reproduction is the most complete and correct.

yes, I agree it is a very fine reproduction of an 1849 Jaques and Frank has added the very nice lozenge touch..  this set ( below) we were fortunate enough to have a collector who owns an original and we were able to reproduce it very well. 

I am disappointed that our reproductions have angered some forum members /collectors it seems, as this is never our intention. Nowadays there are many really good repros offered by a few retailers and manufacturers so at least that has been achieved. 

here is our 1849 3.5 inch Cooke repro for anyone interested 

https://www.officialstaunton.com/collections/luxury-chess-pieces/products/cooke-3-5-edition-boxwood-ebony-chess-pieces

This thread is a great reference for pictures and discussion that we ever had on the forums.  

Let me remind all members of chess.com that there are a few guidelines which are being broken from time to time. These come from chess.com and not myself. I am only to enforce then when they get out of hand. 

Community Conduct Policy

1. Be kind, helpful, and forgiving
2. Do not abuse, attack, threaten, discriminate, or mistreat other members in any way
3. Do not hijack threads, troll, or post distracting or meaningless content
4. Do not post spam, advertisements, or copy/paste comments and messages
5. Do not excessively promote your club
6. Do not publicly debate religious or political topics
7. Do not post obscene or pornographic content
8. Do not discuss illegal activities
9. Do not open more than one account

#3 was enforced a couple of times when we had someone posting such silly comments and just false statements as to drive some active members away.

#2 in this thread is getting close. When you accuse someone of "FRAUD" that can be considered an attack on a person's character. So please going forward think before saying someone committed fraud. That is a very serious charge. This has nothing to do with trying to limit someones' opinion.  Please in the future going forward you do not make accusations ie: "FRAUD"  this is the meaning.....wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain.

Just curious about this <<WHAT constitutes a "GENUINE" 1849 Reproduction?!?>>

My opinion and I am sure it will get some debate you can not have a GENUINE REPRODUCTION. That in itself is a joke. A GENUINE set would be the real deal, you can not have a genuine reproduction. 

1. truly what something is said to be; authentic.

   "each book is bound in genuine leather"

   synonyms:

   authentic, real, actual, original, pukka, bona fide, true, veritable, unfeigned, unadulterated, unalloyed;

Agree that genuine reproduction doesn't make a lot of sense.  Original reproduction and authentic reproduction are similarly silly.  It's called marketing.   I like a lot of the 1849 reproduction sets on the market right now.  They look like the old antique sets and that is really all they are supposed to do.  And considering not all the 1849 set look the same, the debate gets a little ridiculous.

  Lets face it, it is about profit.  And there is nothing wrong with that.  If you can make your product look or seem a little more special than the other guys, you can charge more money for it.  Fancy boxes, certificates of authenticity (authentic reproductions!), metal plaques, etc.  If that appeals to you then you are in luck because that is available. If you just want to play with some chess pieces that look like the old antique one's, which is all I'm interested in, there are cheaper options.  I'm looking at this set from Staunton Castle on Amazon for under $225.  

Some one here mentioned "crappy boxes" just for the record, the boxes supplied with our 1849 4.4 inch sets are SOLID MAHOGANY! Are Are made in Italy ! Who else is offering a solid mahogany box with a stunning hand carved boxwood ebony set ?  

Yes there are cheaper sets available and sure our sets are reproductions,  but they are exquisite in every way .

Agree GM4-U that Official Staunton sells beautiful chess sets.  I sometimes go to the OS website just to admire the pictures.  As far as the pictures posted here, I prefer the antiqued sets over the plain boxwood.  For me, the real antiques are beautiful with their yellow patina, so why shouldn't a "reproduction"  look the same?  (Just my personal taste, and I know you sell the antiqued sets as well).  

Since you are here, there was a question on the last page about 2 different sets you sell that look very similar.  Can you give us more info on the differences between the 2?  See post 3952 on the last page.  

Hi, sure I will just as soon as We have both designs restocked I'll certainly upload to show the difference 

Thank you 

Incidently price differences are dependent on the sourced pricing and total landed costs to us in the UK 

Maybe in stead of calling them real repos , How about 1849 Jaques tribute sets .

A bit like the many tribute band's that exist .

Does anyone here own this set from CB? I haven't seen anyone post photos. 

https://www.chessbazaar.com/reproduced-1849-original-staunton-pattern-chess-set-in-ebony-box-wood-4-5-king.html 

Well, they are reproductions and not the original, so there is no need to call them tribute sets.

I think of a tribute set being different from the original design as a reproduction is more the same to the original.

From what I have seen and heard, that reproduction set that Frank Camaratta had produced, costing in the $3,000-$4,000 range would be the best reproduction.