Ajajaja, LOL dude, I have another similar situation whit payoneer payment in Argentina... They have a "Cia inspector" solved communist case's. Ajajajaja
Bit the bullet and bought HOS' Havana 1966 set
Sort:
Mar 24, 2018
0
#3
Lol, hilarious post. Congratulations on the purchase please post pics when you receive it.
Mar 24, 2018
0
#4
Wow, congrats. I looked at that set also. It is a beauty.
Yes, please, pics when you get it.
Mar 24, 2018
0
#5
BarronBrowne wrote:
It was touch and go with whether I wanted to go with a HOS set or try an Officialstaunton set while they're on sale. The clincher was that officialstaunton's Havana set doesn't look remotely like the original. The order just went through today because Paypal decided the word "Havana" warranted them blocking the sale while they investigate. Wow. Can't put anything by Paypal. Now I know why my 50 kilo purchase called "Medicinal Hashish" also got declined.
Having done the research behind Official Staunton's version, I can tell you with great certainty that it faithfully reproduces the original set in the renowned collection of Jon Crumiller, who was gracious enough to provide dozens of portrait shots of his pieces. We also consulted with respected collector Manuel Rodriguez, who generously provided photos of his original set. The HOS version looks like it is a good facsimile of the set from the Scottish collector, but what we need to appreciate is that these sets were made by a number of Cuban artisans made them for the event, and there is a noticable range in features among them. The finest of the sets were given as gifts from Fidel Castro to the captains of the Olympiad teams, along with special storage caskets, the slate boards, and the tables with the leather-padded arm rests. The Crumiller set is among these. The Scottish set does not appear to be. As a reproduction of the so-called Marshall set, of which I own an original 1900 Jaques set, the Crumiller/OS version is closer in design than the Scottish/HOS version. In particular, the cut in the bishop miter in the Crumiller/OS version is deep like that in the original Jaques, whereas the Scottish/HOS version is much too shallow.
The Crumiller set...
Mar 24, 2018
0
#6
The Crumiller pieces...
The Rodriguez pieces...
The OS pieces...
Original 1900 Jaques (so-called "Marshall") pieces...
Mar 24, 2018
0
#7
joeukchess wrote:
BarronBrowne wrote:
It was touch and go with whether I wanted to go with a HOS set or try an Officialstaunton set while they're on sale. The clincher was that officialstaunton's Havana set doesn't look remotely like the original. The order just went through today because Paypal decided the word "Havana" warranted them blocking the sale while they investigate. Wow. Can't put anything by Paypal. Now I know why my 50 kilo purchase called "Medicinal Hashish" also got declined.
agreed official Staunton's version doesn't appear to look as good as House of Staunton Havana, but I ran a google search and there is this
https://stauntoncastle.com/collections/antique-chess-pieces/products/havana-1966-circa-reproduction-staunton-chessmen
To each his own, but the OS version faithfully reproduces the Crumiller collection original, which was one of the premier versions of the 1966 originals, and as I've elsewhere posted here, to my eye, the OS version is closer to the 1900 Jaques original it is intended to emulate (the so-called "Marshall" set). As to Staunton Castle, its set is identical to the OS version. As I understand the story, the carver OS retained to make their pieces started selling them under the Staunton Castle name.
Mar 24, 2018
0
#8
Here is my review of the OS Havana '66 set published when it first was released...
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-equipment/the-whole-country-was-one-mighty-chessboard-official-staunton-s-1966-havana-olympiad
Here are some more photos of the OS set from my review and files...
@cgrau thanks you take such beautiful photos
Mar 24, 2018
0
#11
cgrau wrote:
BarronBrowne wrote:
It was touch and go with whether I wanted to go with a HOS set or try an Officialstaunton set while they're on sale. The clincher was that officialstaunton's Havana set doesn't look remotely like the original. The order just went through today because Paypal decided the word "Havana" warranted them blocking the sale while they investigate. Wow. Can't put anything by Paypal. Now I know why my 50 kilo purchase called "Medicinal Hashish" also got declined.
Having done the research behind Official Staunton's version, I can tell you with great certainty that it faithfully reproduces the original set in the renowned collection of Jon Crumiller, who was gracious enough to provide dozens of portrait shots of his pieces. We also consulted with respected collector Manuel Rodriguez, who generously provided photos of his original set. The HOS version looks like it is a good facsimile of the set from the Scottish collector, but what we need to appreciate is that these sets were made by a number of Cuban artisans made them for the event, and there is a noticable range in features among them. The finest of the sets were given as gifts from Fidel Castro to the captains of the Olympiad teams, along with special storage caskets, the slate boards, and the tables with the leather-padded arm rests. The Crumiller set is among these. The Scottish set does not appear to be. As a reproduction of the so-called Marshall set, of which I own an original 1900 Jaques set, the Crumiller/OS version is closer in design than the Scottish/HOS version. In particular, the cut in the bishop miter in the Crumiller/OS version is deep like that in the original Jaques, whereas the Scottish/HOS version is much too shallow.
The Crumiller set...
maybe it was just the pictures, then. it looked like they'd done something really weird with the bishop, where they put a big gap in the mitre that didn't look authentic to what the original set had.
Mar 24, 2018
0
#12
BarronBrowne wrote:
maybe it was just the pictures, then. it looked like they'd done something really weird with the bishop, where they put a big gap in the mitre that didn't look authentic to what the original set had.
Sorry, Barron. I don't find anything distorted about the OS pictures. Nor is there anything in them that makes the bishop look "weird." It was mistaken to assume that the picture of the original you found on the HOS page, and compared the pictures of the OS set to, depicts the only version of the set. The truth is, the original that HOS used is not the only version of the set; it's not even the most desirable version of the set. The Crumiller set is. And the OS set is a faithful reproduction of the Crumiller set. The truth is that the miter cuts on the HOS set and on the Scottish original that are odd. It's not just that they look oddly short, but compared to the 1900 Jaques (so-called "Marshall") set everyone agrees the Havana set strives to emulate, the Crumiller original and the OS reproduction come closer to copying it than the Scottish original and the HOS version do. If you prefer stunted miter cuts, however, then the HOS version surely is preferable.
Mar 24, 2018
0
#13
well, I'm looking right at the original set, and the bishops do have the "stunted" miter cuts, just as my protoype Marshall set did, which the Havana set was based on. You're welcome to think the HOS version isn't the most desirable, but that isn't exactly something that is provable. If you like the OS version, then by all means, go with God. Peace be with you.
Mar 25, 2018
0
#14
You're right, Barron, there is no accounting for taste, but the pictures I've posted demonstrate that the Crumiller original Havana set set is closer in design to the original 1900 Marshall set than the Scottish original HOS used, particularly with the deeper miter cuts, and that the Official Staunton version is a closer reproduction of the Crumiller set and the original 1900 Marshall than the HOS version is. Those are facts verified by the pictures posted.
Again, you mistakenly refer to "the" original, when the evidence shows there are at least three: the Scottish version you apparently refer to, but not posted, and the Crumiller and Rodriguez versions that I've posted. Both the Crumiller and Rodriguez versions have the deeper miter cuts found in the Official Staunton version.
Again, you mistakenly refer to "the" original, when the evidence shows there are at least three: the Scottish version you apparently refer to, but not posted, and the Crumiller and Rodriguez versions that I've posted. Both the Crumiller and Rodriguez versions have the deeper miter cuts found in the Official Staunton version.
That's the most beautiful rook I've ever seen. BTW, isn't hashish a kind of drug?
@cgrau: what a collection in the background!
Mar 25, 2018
0
#17
xuhongkang123 wrote:
That's the most beautiful rook I've ever seen. BTW, isn't hashish a kind of drug?
:-) more like an herbal tea.
Mar 25, 2018
0
#18
Bfighter4935 wrote:
@cgrau: what a collection in the background!
Many thanks, Olivier!
Mar 25, 2018
0
#19
I've described the shortened miter cut of the HOS set and the Scottish set, but haven't illustrated what I'm talking about. Here are comparative shots of the Scottish original that HOS used, and the Crumiller and Rodriguez sets that Official Staunton used.
Scottish original:
Crumiller original:
Rodriguez original:
Rodriguez original rook:
Now here is an original 1900 Jaques "Marshall" set, upon which the Havana '66 sets were modeled:
Finally, here are the HOS and Official Staunton versions of the '66 set. Everyone can decide for themselves what they like the most, and, based on the photos, which version is most accurate.
The HOS reproduction:
The Official Staunton reproduction:
It was touch and go with whether I wanted to go with a HOS set or try an Officialstaunton set while they're on sale. The clincher was that officialstaunton's Havana set doesn't look remotely like the original. The order just went through today because Paypal decided the word "Havana" warranted them blocking the sale while they investigate. Wow. Can't put anything by Paypal. Now I know why my 50 kilo purchase called "Medicinal Hashish" also got declined.