Thanks for this info Chuck! I bought my Havana repro to stauntoncastle.com which seems to be the exact previous design of the OS. OS design now shown in the web looks quite different...
Bit the bullet and bought HOS' Havana 1966 set
Sort:
Stauntonmaster wrote:
that depends on you taste, but they farder from the original design
The House of Staunton Havana version is more accurate in regard to proportion and dimensions.
Mar 25, 2018
0
#24
Fer8799 wrote:
Thanks for this info Chuck! I bought my Havana repro to stauntoncastle.com which seems to be the exact previous design of the OS. OS design now shown in the web looks quite different...
okay, so maybe I'm not just losing my mind. When I saw the recent OS 25% off sale, I was ecstatic because I'd been longing for their Havana set. Then, when I saw the limited pictures provided, I was thinking, "Man, this just isn't what I remembered." It looked like maybe the set was being crafted by a completely different set of workmen.
Mar 25, 2018
0
#25
Fer8799 wrote:
Thanks for this info Chuck! I bought my Havana repro to stauntoncastle.com which seems to be the exact previous design of the OS. OS design now shown in the web looks quite different...
The fellow who owns and operated Staunton Castle manufactured the first run of Official Staunton sets. He then began selling them on his own account. OS replaced him with another manufacturer.
Mar 25, 2018
0
#26
Aizen89 wrote:
Cgrau: Are all of these pics from your personal collection? Can you describe a bit about your collection as it stands today? I'm just getting into collecting chess stuff (starting with autographs and objects used by famous players themselves, but I also want to delve into old stuff as well), and I could use some advice and inspiration. Also, where do you get your stuff?
Thanks, Aizen. The photos of the OS and 1900 Jaques sets are from my collection. My primary interest is in Soviet sets, but I also collect other Eastern European, German, Spanish, Latin American, Lardy, and English Staunton sets. I have bought from vendors on Ebay and Etsy, House of Staunton, Official Staunton, ChessBazaar, and NOJ Slovenia.
I like doing historical research and working with vendors to reproduce sets of historical interest. For example, I worked with NOJ Slovenia to reproduce the Tal set and Official Staunton to reproduce the Havana '66 set. I am particularly interested in sets from Olympiads, and have originals or reproductions from Munich '36, Buenos Aires '39, Dubrovnik '50, Moscow '56, Nice '74, and Buenos Aires '78 Olympiads. I have Lisa Lane's Drueke Player's Choice set, a Lardy set Bobby Fischer likely played with at his 1964 simul in Indianapolis, and an original Steiner set as used in the Piatigorsky tournaments. You can check out my reviews on many of my sets here in this forum.
The best advice I could offer is to do a little research before you decide what to collect and which sets to buy. Check out the set reviews on this site and the Facebook groups Chess Collectors, Staunton Chess Sets Vintage and Reproductions, and Official Fide Tournament Sets. Please feel free to message me privately, too.
Mar 25, 2018
0
#27
Stauntonmaster wrote:
The Havan chess set is very average and ordinary in look and style and as a result it should never be classified as a luxury range. The set was originally made for international tournament and therefore the style and quality was kept simple and average. Also, the replica is different in many respects from the original although effort was made to create a sort of rough copy.
Everyone is certainly entitled to their own opinion.
It is the Havana, not Havan, set by the way.
There are a number of qualified people that do call this set a luxury set, so to say it is not is certainly a matter of opinion and not fact.
The sets originally made for international tournaments are not necessarily simple or average.
Also, there are many different manufacturers making replicas of sets. Those replicas range in accuracy as well, from exact to rough and everything in between.
Perhaps it is time for Stauntonmaster to say something nice about chess equipment instead of always being so negative.
Mar 25, 2018
0
#28
Eyechess wrote:
Stauntonmaster wrote:
The Havan chess set is very average and ordinary in look and style and as a result it should never be classified as a luxury range. The set was originally made for international tournament and therefore the style and quality was kept simple and average. Also, the replica is different in many respects from the original although effort was made to create a sort of rough copy.
Everyone is certainly entitled to their own opinion.
It is the Havana, not Havan, set by the way.
There are a number of qualified people that do call this set a luxury set, so to say it is not is certainly a matter of opinion and not fact.
The sets originally made for international tournaments are not necessarily simple or average.
Also, there are many different manufacturers making replicas of sets. Those replicas range in accuracy as well, from exact to rough and everything in between.
Perhaps it is time for Stauntonmaster to say something nice about chess equipment instead of always being so negative.
Good to hear from you Ron. I'm not holding my breath, and I suspect neither are you.
Mar 25, 2018
0
#29
Aizen89 wrote:
That's amazing! Truly awesome to hear of a collection like yours! Out of curiosity, what is your opinion of sets from recent big tournaments? As I mentioned, I'm paying off one of five sets used by all the players in the Sinquefield 2017 tournament. It comes with box included, DGT compatible, autographs, etc... Originally $3k, but I got a 20% discount on them. My goal is to own a piece of history, but to also have something that I believe will appreciate in value over the long haul.
Congrats on the set! I'm into older pieces, and not a fan of the currently ubiquitous German knight. I have an old House of Staunton Imperial Collector set in sandalwood. It's a gorgeous set, and basically the same as the Sinquefield set, without the hands on tournament use. By the time the tournament sets in current use become classics, I'll long have been feeding the worms.
Mar 25, 2018
0
#30
cgrau wrote:
Eyechess wrote:
Stauntonmaster wrote:
The Havan chess set is very average and ordinary in look and style and as a result it should never be classified as a luxury range. The set was originally made for international tournament and therefore the style and quality was kept simple and average. Also, the replica is different in many respects from the original although effort was made to create a sort of rough copy.
Everyone is certainly entitled to their own opinion.
It is the Havana, not Havan, set by the way.
There are a number of qualified people that do call this set a luxury set, so to say it is not is certainly a matter of opinion and not fact.
The sets originally made for international tournaments are not necessarily simple or average.
Also, there are many different manufacturers making replicas of sets. Those replicas range in accuracy as well, from exact to rough and everything in between.
Perhaps it is time for Stauntonmaster to say something nice about chess equipment instead of always being so negative.
Good to hear from you Ron. I'm not holding my breath, and I suspect neither are you.
Hello Chuck, I have a question for you regarding the Havana set. I remember that you worked with Carl of Official Staunton to have them reproduce the Havana set. And I understand there might be more than one original style or rendition.
With all that, which Havana set looks to be the best reproduction, in your opinion?
Mar 25, 2018
0
#31
Hi Ron! I like the Crumiller and Rodriguez originals because they are closest to the 1900 Jaques "Marshall" set, and appear in photos of the event with Petrosian, Spassky, Castro, and others. The OS set is closest to the Crumiller and Rodriguez sets. Of course, I am biased.
Mar 25, 2018
0
#32
It looks like the OS set is not available at this time, as I cannot find it on their web page.
Mar 25, 2018
0
#33
Hi Ron, I think Carl is redoing the page and expecting a new batch of sets in. I'd suggest emailing him.
Mar 25, 2018
0
#34
cgrau wrote:
Hi Ron, I think Carl is redoing the page and expecting a new batch of sets in. I'd suggest emailing him.
Thanks.
Mar 25, 2018
0
#35
cgrau wrote:
Hi Ron, I think Carl is redoing the page and expecting a new batch of sets in. I'd suggest emailing him.
so they took my advice! 🤓
Mar 28, 2018
0
#36
for anyone still interested, before we got thread-jacked by the OS rep, the set showed up today, and it's a beauty! I took pictures but I'm not satisfied with them. I'm going to have to shoot RAW and then edit to try to get the colors right. The ebonized set looks ebonized, obviously, but the antiqued pieces just really look fine. The knights have a level of detail to them that is outstanding for a set in this price range. The bishops look perfect. I worried a little about the bishop's mitre, which in pictures looks pretty shallow, but in proportion to the piece size, it works perfectly. I'll try to put a thread up with pictures in a couple of days.
for sell 
BarronBrowne wrote:
... before we got thread-jacked by the OS rep...
that's rather uncalled for, in addition to being factually incorrect. Chuck is a well-respected collector who has contributed a lot to this forum, and who has been instrumental in getting several repros into the market via Noj and OS.
I know the whereabouts of an original 1966 set. I haven’t seen it yet. It was described as having billiard cloth and that it was confiscated by A Caribbean islands government. The owner of the set would like to sell. I dont know what the correct route to sell would be. Maybe EBay? Auction? Any input on your part would be helpful. Thanks
I've always had a soft spot for it myself. I think I just like the fact that it is different from seemingly 95% of what one sees with bishops. The OS set certainly is a nice looking set (if they'd used the pictures provided here, it might have swayed me. The OS pictures just to me make the set look chintzy). But I like the stunted look.