Reproduction and Real Jaques of London Chess Set

This is the data I sent along with exact samples on the upcoming 3.5" set and some process pictures. as you can see there are two slightly different knights heads in the set. One has a long face and one short with slight differences in carving style also. Prof. Sir Alan Fersht, the Jaques expert has commented on this and proposes that the knights heads were carved in batches by several carvers and thrown into a box to be matched up with sets later. Now of course it is possible that knights were swapped over in chess clubs later but this set is so rare and the knights so different to other Jaques offerings that I think that is unlikely especially as this set was clearly retailed by Leuchars a very upmarket shop in Knightbridge in London and would have been sold as an expensive gift to an individual. Jaques sold direct to chess clubs at a discount.

So you see it is not just finding an early set and getting it copied there are other considerations including production process matters to consider.

The sample pieces are in transit at the moment and I am trying to track them down.

https://plus.google.com/photos/116152809472643080958/albums/6051567001695902289?banner=pwa&sort=1

Looks good Alan.! Have you found the 3.5 missing pieces that were shipped yet.?

I and many others saw those pictures a month or two back and that's what i thought CB was producing. There is a world of difference between the protoype knights and the final ones and the rooks are notably different too. I understand what you say, Alan, about carvers putting their own slant on things, but surely the point with a reproduction is to try to reduce that to a minimum and reproduce the original as closely as possible. I have to be honest here and say I am disappointed with the look of the production set.

Alan, we are unable to view that last album you linked do to permission settings.

I am in agreement with Andy here. While there may have been considerable variation in the style of Knight heads in the past, the goal of this set should have been to nearly as exactly replicate a single 1849 set as possible. Interpretation should be kept to an absolute minimum.

The 1849 Prototypes looked very much more like what is shown on Alan Fersht and Jon Crumiller's sites across a variety of designs from that year.  I've not seen any photos of a Knight from that year that looks close to what is now being offered by Chess Bazaar. 

This is the Knight in the style we were expecting to see: 

From the No. 8 set on britishchesssets.com

There is this group of Knights, and I do see some similarities to the Chess Bazaar Knight in some of them, but these are from the 3.5" sets. 
Did Chess Bazaar base this Knight off of one of the 3.5" designs?

Andy, to me the rooks look a lot closer than what the pawns do. the pawns look like they have been on a diet, the pawns in the original are fatter in the stem and base. looking at the pictures.  Rooks Queen King bishop look fairly close but then they are simplier to copy.  If it lacks anywhere it is in the knights, at least give it a nose, and the pawns. But still worth the value of $349. 

I somehow feel people in 5-10 years will look back at this set glad they bought it as wages and materials rise in India this set will cost double in 5-10 years easily.  Is the Jacques 4.4" on the Jacques set  worth every penny of $5999.99 with a $350 box?   Now that's a leap of faith if I ever saw one.

I think the set looks amazing. Looking forward to using it for home play/studym. Great work, Alan.

There is a lot to be said for this set aside from the Knights, I'll try to get into it later tonight. 

For instance, the weight is 80 ounces.  Nice and heavy. 

No doubt the set is nice looking.! I think some were expecting more Historical accuracy in the Knights at least. JMO

On closer inspection, you're right – the pawns look thinner and the top angle on the collar is much more pronounced. Sadly for me, I didn't like the pawns from the prototype set to start with, because I think the neck is too short in comparison to the base and ball and collar.

Interestingly, the CB site shows the plans and measurements for the prototype knights in the advertising and given that they originally said it was going to be out weeks ago, I wonder whether they had problems in production and had to drop the prototype design for whatever reason.

Yes, I'm sure that those who like this set will not regret buying it, but it's just not the set for me and I know I'll not regret that decision either. But there's also no way I'd pay $6000 for the current Jaques set, even if I unreservedly loved it (which I don't).

Below are, from left: original Jaques (from Prof Fersht's site), prototype (from Mr Dewey's site), and production (from CB's site).

Everyone will make up their own minds about this set, I'm sure. I bought one primarily because it looks like a very playable set at an ok price, and I'm less concerned about it being an exact replica. I'm especially impressed with the antiqued boxwood - often this treatment produces a very dull finish, but judging by the photos they did a good job with that. 

A random thought: has anyone actually ordered one of the Amritsar sets?  I had several PMs asking where to buy, but heard nothing afterwards...

After reading much of the comments in this thread, I've become aware that you know far more about old chess sets than I do.  Does anyone know which set was used in Lasker v Tarrasch in their 1908 match?  Thanks for any information you can give me.

We'd need to see a photo to be able to identify it.  Broadly speaking it was probably a Jaques or British Chess Company set.    But other designs like the French Regence design were common at the time too. 

Can't tell much from the photo on this page except that the pieces seem to be of a Staunton design...no surprises there.

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.pl?tid=54099

I spoke with the live chat at Chess Bazaar and it is possible to get the new set with the Knight design from the first revision.  This may be what many people on this thread would be most interested in. 

Good thinking, Jack. Would the knights be the same size as the original set (ie, slightly too big) or did you not discuss that?

I didn't discuss it, but I'd say they wouldn't change the design.  They probably just have a certain number of spare ones made up they could dip into for special orders. 

I think regardless this will become a very rare set.  ANd I also think the price is fair. if you do not then try to buy the wood and hire a carver here in the USA and see if you can come close to the $349.00 price.  If you did that you would exceed over $1K. 

Have a few feelings for people in other countries who are excellent craftsman, they have to eat too. I am not a rich man by any means and I like to save money just like the next guy but I also take into consideration other people when I make dealings. Let's be fair. 

Its a nice set for a good price & free shipping. I was taken aback by the face on view of the Knight though. Its OK but, not what I was expecting. It looks just like the German Knight face on from the International Set I have. I am not really a Knight person though so, it should be fine in practice like the German Knight. From the side view the Knight looks awesome IMO.

You've lost me here. I can't see where anyone is suggesting that the price is not fair or that the set is not a nice set; all I see is some discussion over the style of the pieces not being what at least some of us expected, based on the prototype. How is that not being fair?

As for it being a rare set, I'm not so sure. I expect that, if it sells well, then CB will keep producing it, especially now that they've done all the groundwork on it. The first generation sets might command a bit of a premium, but I've seen a few early HoS sets go for low prices or be passed in recently, so I'm not convinced that this matters to people as long as similar sets are still available new. And, given the number of 1849-based sets out there, I imagine that the style will be around for a while yet. Not that this should matter anyway — Alan was very clear that he wants these sets to be used rather than hoarded.