Bob,
Gorgeous set. Love the board, a real beauty! Are the corners sloped, or is it just the photo?
Reproduction and Real Jaques of London Chess Set
Sort:
Jun 12, 2017
0
#2364
rcmacmillan wrote:
GM4U wrote:
nice! cant beat the real deal I guess
Says the man who has made six of my chess sets Don't worry, Carl. I'll still buy yours!
haha 
Jun 12, 2017
0
#2366
CHARLES WHY MUDDY THE WATERS HERE?
There are many valid reasons why we for one originally thought it was the exact same knight and that too was down to the manufactures blatant spinning!! so please refrain from your blatant attempt of undermining. Just enjoy the set you successfully had pirated for your good self.
Fascinating!
Carl has no problem with having one of his manufacturers make the EXACT same design as the $3500 HOS chess set when Carl sells it to the public.
However when Carl thinks one of his manufacturers has made the set and not sold it to Carl first, then as if by magic, Frank C has exclusive rights to the set and Carl's manufacturer is dishonest.
And by the way the custom chess set I had made comes with several facts:
Fact 1: I designed the knight personally, just look at it and you can tell it is much more beautiful than the HOS knights I complained about on January 16, 2017 (post 2072) of this thread.
I have to go right now, but many more facts will follow until Carl apologizes to me and the manufacturer of my completely custom chess set that I designed.
Jun 12, 2017
0
#2369
UthorPendragon wrote:
Fascinating!
Carl has no problem with having one of his manufacturers make the EXACT same design as the $3500 HOS chess set when Carl sells it to the public.
However when Carl thinks one of his manufacturers has made the set and not sold it to Carl first, then as if by magic, Frank C has exclusive rights to the set and Carl's manufacturer is dishonest.
And by the way the custom chess set I had made comes with several facts:
Fact 1: I designed the knight personally, just look at it and you can tell it is much more beautiful than the HOS knights I complained about on January 16, 2017 (post 2072) of this thread.
I have to go right now, but many more facts will follow until Carl apologizes to me and the manufacturer of my completely custom chess set that I designed.
Let me just advise that today I have spoken to the manufacturer head honcho and emailed Frank Camaratta about this. There is a ton of stuff you simply do not know and I dont want to spoil this thread more than I have to, suffice to say that knight was offered to us first until Frank C contacted me to advise it was his set made from a original which he paid $14,000 for!
at that time we were actively looking to make a decent reproduction. The crossed wires is simply that we believed the set was offered to us as unique to us, then I foolishly posted (the above in bold post) unknowing that This design belonged to Frank…..After many emails with Frank, and he proven pre eminence I agreed to not have the same knights supplied with our 1851 sets.
Naturally it took time to believe Frank side of the story however when the manufacturer visited my company here in the UK it all became very clear.; and of course I was very disheartened to learn I was promised one design only to have a very similar knight made for our purposes.
You haven’t designed anything at all. You have been sold the same set that is sold to Frank, in terms of the more important pieces ( knights)
You can tell all the falsehood you like Charles and coupled with the now sacked manufacturer,,Im sure you will be posting a ton of bullshit lies, but that is just you isn't it. Good Luck. with that.
by the way I have total admission from the manufacturer today that this is the same set he supplies to Frank and that he sold it to you for $1000 ! If you need more TRUE fact then just ask. Remember one thing though I have been dealing with this company for over 15 years and know what they are capable of.......so be very careful what you believe is true.
you can see the similarities in the 1851 knight.
Following this exchange with interest.
what Carl is saying totally matches what other people have been telling me privately. It's a crying shame that we are being deprived of some historically important replica sets because of shenanigans from certain users trying to take shortcuts w/ manufacturers, and in the process taking advantage of the efforts put in by others. I call that piracy....
In case anyone is unclear what is going on here, Jaques of London adopted a chess set design in 1849 which has become the standard set used in competition chess all over the world. They were either lucky or very clever. I have met JJ5 and concluded that luck played a very large part in bequeathing us the sets we now regard as standard.
As a consequence the sharks are fighting over the carcase.
It is a shame that Jaques cannot sue due to a 1944 legal ruling which meant that they do not have the right to Staunton's name
This thread gets better and better.
http://www.chessspy.com/articles/Staunton%20Chess%20Set%20Design.pdf
OK, So to start from the beginning, this is how we ended up with the 'Staunton' design as the set used in all competitions world wide. ( see above)
Now Jaques wanted to keep this design to themselves, but in about 1944 they sued B H Wood who was making, rather bad copies of 'Staunton' sets. Jaques won the first trial, but lost on appeal as a very dodgy chess dealer in London came to Wood's rescue with a fake 18th c bone set which he claimed, as an 'expert' witness was genuine. (it wasn't).
So we end up today, with drop shop kiddies in the home counties of England, thinking they are doing something clever. They are not.
Jun 12, 2017
0
#2375
Well, we can't all get to use real antique Jaques sets in tournaments (thanks for those brilliant pics of your set rcmacmillan 
), but the idea of bringing these terrific reproduction sets to the chess community as display on top boards just adds a historical interest that I enjoy and think would be popular. Why can't we all cooperate?
Well, Mark,
It is a long and sorry story. Perhaps it will be told one day.
Hi Robert,
I am rethinking about taking apprentices here in the States.Perhaps that is the way to go.
However let us not forget that Jaques actually own the rights to the Staunton pattern design. In fact, even if it cannot be legally enforced. Frank et al are merely copying their sets, as I have as a restorer for 30 years or more, but I do not claim to be anything other than a copyist
chessspy1 wrote:
Well, Mark,
It is a long and sorry story. Perhaps it will be told one day.
Which brings to mind another less serious one ... with due consideration to Lewis Carroll.
`Mine is a long and a sad tale!' said the Mouse, turning to Alice, and sighing.
`It IS a long tail, certainly,' said Alice, looking down with wonder at the Mouse's tail' `but why do you call it sad?' And she kept on puzzling about it while the Mouse was speaking, so that her idea of the tale was something like this."
`Fury said to a
mouse, That he
met in the
house,
"Let us
both go to
law: I will
prosecute
YOU. --Come,
I'll take no
denial; We
must have a
trial: For
really this
morning I've
nothing
to do."
Said the
mouse to the
cur, "Such
a trial,
dear Sir,
With
no jury
or judge,
would be
wasting
our
breath."
"I'll be
judge, I'll
be jury,"
Said
cunning
old Fury:
"I'll
try the
whole
cause,
and
condemn
you
to
death."
ElCanarion!
Isn't this fun!
Now you know why I like Chavet knights also.
Lol!
RC, I have done more to bring an accurate and beautiful 1849 Large Club Chess Set to the general public than anyone one this forum and you know it!
Alas you are NOT a True "Seeker of The Grail" anymore.
I'm going to bed now and I will sleep easy.
It's OK RC, there are very few Galahads. I just wished you were one of them.
Onward toward the James Bond vision of chess in a Venetian palace 😁