x
Chess - Play & Learn

Chess.com

FREE - In Google Play

FREE - in Win Phone Store

VIEW

Official Staunton's Amazing 1849 Antique Lacquered and Ebony Chess Set

  • #21

    IpswichMatt wrote:

    Templars, how about deleting that post? It was a bit unpleasant

    No .why ? because he asserts and all others are wrong for him clear 1849 is not like his 1849 sample I agree it's too much shine only but others his points are observational wrong The both set design are total huge differences I size also
  • #22
    TemplarsKnights wrote:

    verbal  bullshit nonsence .... any collectors are here? explains to this idiot verbal nonsence maximrecoil sets are total differnce ..he has no clue at all ..idiot....he visits lots other forum to mkae nonense bullsht arguing..it tracked him dowm, now ignore this fool

     

     

    Your non sequitur is dismissed, and given that you have no further arguments, your tacit concession on the whole matter is noted.

  • #23

    @MaximRecoil & @TemplarsKnights 

    Please move your discussion to PM, it’s not welcome nor relevant here.

  • #24

    MaximRecoil wrote:

    TemplarsKnights wrote:

    verbal  bullshit nonsence .... any collectors are here? explains to this idiot verbal nonsence maximrecoil sets are total differnce ..he has no clue at all ..idiot....he visits lots other forum to mkae nonense bullsht arguing..it tracked him dowm, now ignore this fool

     

     

    Your non sequitur is dismissed, and given that you have no further arguments, your tacit concession on the whole matter is noted.

    Yes if you type your above words in Google you use same on other forum..same bullshit words same arguing same themes of argue ratio ..you win big butt hurt
  • #25
    TemplarsKnights wrote:

    Yes if you type your above words in Google you use same on other forum..same bullshit words same arguing same themes of argue ratio ..you win big butt hurt

     

    That's because your invalid method of "arguing" is very common. Your tacit concession on the whole matter remains noted, of course.

  • #26

    Anyway back on topic..

    Does anyone think the muzzle on this new knight is a little too long? In my opinion it would look much more harmonious if it was ever so slightly shorter:

    null

  • #27

    Minarima wrote:

    Anyway back on topic..

    Does anyone think the muzzle on this new knight is a little too long? In my opinion it would look much more harmonious if it was ever so slightly shorter:

    null

    Yes I agree with you
  • #28
    TemplarsKnights wrote:
    IpswichMatt wrote:

    Templars, how about deleting that post? It was a bit unpleasant

    No .why ? because he asserts and all others are wrong for him clear 1849 is not like his 1849 sample I agree it's too much shine only but others his points are observational wrong The both set design are total huge differences I size also

    I agree with you about the differences between the Knights (for what it's worth) - but that post was a personal attack, no need for that 

  • #29

    IpswichMatt wrote:

    TemplarsKnights wrote:
    IpswichMatt wrote:

    Templars, how about deleting that post? It was a bit unpleasant

    No .why ? because he asserts and all others are wrong for him clear 1849 is not like his 1849 sample I agree it's too much shine only but others his points are observational wrong The both set design are total huge differences I size also

    I agree with you about the differences between the Knights (for what it's worth) - but that post was a personal attack, no need for that 

    ok apologise for that ok
  • #30

    Lacquered pieces often have a lot of shine, which will cause eye-strain for serious chessplayers.  

  • #31

    Very nice pieces, and really great quality, but out of my scope due to the high price (even if It is cheaper than HOS pieces). btw, OS don't give the option to buy only pieces, but box is also included, which increase a lot the final price. why this change?

  • #32
  • #33

    Has anyone pre-ordered this set?

  • #34

    I would prefer 550€ without box.
  • #35
    Fer8799 wrote:

    I would prefer 550€ without box.

    ya myself too no need box 

  • #36
    I own several early sets from 1849 and lacquer was NOT used. Also, what is the obsession with $1200 replica 1849 club sets? I’ve seen something like seven variations from multiple vendors...is there something in the water in India?
  • #37
    jcousins1 wrote:
    I own several early sets from 1849 and lacquer was NOT used. Also, what is the obsession with $1200 replica 1849 club sets? I’ve seen something like seven variations from multiple vendors...is there something in the water in India?

    luckily you!! to obtain real 1849 jacques...not me...i can no have that money for 1849 so buy reproduction only 

  • #38
    jcousins1 wrote:
    I own several early sets from 1849 and lacquer was NOT used. 

     

    It’s likely that the original 1849 Jaques sets were polished using a simple clear polishing wax, perhaps even while on the lathe itself, and the knights by hand (hence why the deep concave grooves in early knight head carvings are often darker as these areas were sometimes missed during the hand polishing process, resulting a darker matt appearance over time compared to other convex areas).

Top

Online Now