Reproduction and Real Jaques of London Chess Set

Wow!!!  I just found this thread and it looks like my HoS professional set is an imitation Jaques of London set?!??  I 1st fell in love with this set in 2006 (Hos) when I spied the Knight and Bishop, love the detail on the kinght and adored the WIDE/DEEP cut in the Bishop's Pontiff...  (See below).  I've been looking for another set bigger/heavier and now I *KNOW* to look for "Jaques" in the description.  This is an awesome forum so glad I joined!!!     

My 2006 HOS "Professional" set... Lacquer Gloss finish!!

Be aware when you're looking on eBay etc that many sellers don't really know what a Jaques set is. Many believe that the crown marks on one Rook and Knight of each colour indicate a Jaques set - I've known more than one antique dealer making this mistake. A Jaques set will always have the White King marked as such on the top of the base, sometimes the Black King too.The box should have the correct label - if not this reduces the value significantly.

If in doubt, post pics here or start a new thread. You don't need to pay the earth for a Jaques set (unless you go for a really early one - see chasbernie's set above!), I've bought a few Jaques sets at prices ranging from £120 to £1000

$773.47 for Paperback Version !!! 😳 

Hi Robert!  

Thanks for the shout.  There are a fair few sets over here now thanks to the age of the internet - we can participate in auctions live (not just eBay) whereas years ago only our British colleagues had access to those deals.  I think its really taken a bite out of the dealer's business as well as they seemed to source most of their offerings from auction houses.  Some of them still do.  There is a large Club size Jaques up for sale right now by a dealer, with an "Entered No." label that was unmistakably sold at auction over a year ago.  It's unmistakable because the set was obviously in a house fire, and although the dealer has managed to have a superb restoration of the set and box, the label of the box still bears the scorch marks - which looks rather funny given that the rest of the set has been fully restored, so the label looks out of place.  Anyway, I digress.  

Also, YES - a crown stamp on a knight or rook top does no equal Jaques.  HOWEVER, some Jaques sets were NOT stamped on the foot rim of the white king.  Example: I have a 3.1" set, unweighted, unfelted in original Jaques slide-top box with label.  Each of the 32 pieces has an original registration lozenge.  However, if you search the white king you will find no stamp.  

I wasn't aware of such sets - please can you post some pictures? I'm sure lots people would like to see them

I'm not convinced they are from different sets - there are usually small variations in old Jaques sets. Possibly a different carver did the ebony Knights.

Speaking of mis-matched Knights - I've just seen this come up on a salesroom auction

I believe Alan Fersht's book discusses it (the second edition) unsigned Jaques sets. He used to have a really superb Picasa gallery where he collected photos of all known "hand-signed" Jaques sets and a bunch of great images of other sets.

Unsigned Jaques sets are a tricky subject.  For a while, there was a "boom" on bone sets based on AF's second-edition book which found a few confirmed knights that had fairly distinctive carvings.  From that, and the remnants of the pattern-book there was a collecting craze for bone chess sets that could be attributed to Jaques.  That seems to have died off, but it did leave the prices of some of the better bone sets a bit higher than when it started.

With other sets, like St. George, Upright and even the few unsigned Staunton sets, there needs to be a LOT of evidence to prove the "exception" to the stamping rule.  

@IpswichMatt I will try to get some photos for you this evening.  I work more working from home than I ever did going to the office!

It shows $5.94 for Kindle version.

@rcmacmillan
Yes, you are right. The price difference is due to location.

NO. Mine is Dirt Poor Cheap Quality. (joking)

@rcmacmillan
You got it right. There are people like you understand economics better than others.
Those others must read this study.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/09/190906104111.htm

Yes, thats what I thought. Ok. Back to Jacques.

@IpswichMatt: Here are photos of an early Jaques Library Size set that bears NO "Jaques London" stamp, but has original box and Reg Lozenges:

Thanks for posting those pictures Mr Cousins, very nice. 

Do I need to point out that the man said the KINDLE EDITION: $9.99???

Hummmmm Unweighted *and* Unfelted?!? Isn't a bit strange to have such a set?!? Was this one of Jaques' "Bargain Basement sets?!? I was under the impression all Jaques' sets were BOTH Weighted *and* Felted. Thank God I am no where NEAR that set... or at least to play with that set. I simply can not play with an unweighted set. My tremors are such that unweighted pieces simply go flying in all directions just trying to move a piece from Point A to Point B (that does not include *taking* another piece which adds a whole another dimension to what is already a tricky proposition.  Probably one of the reasons i like HoS PLASTIC (sacrilege on a discussion of fine WOODEN Jaques sets. Forgive me Father for having sinned). Marshall pieces. It is CHEAP, HEAVY, and a REALLY Good Looking set. 

As a matter of CURIOSITY (it will be the death of me yet) do you ever actually PLAY with that unweighted set?!?  While I *MIGHT* be willing if offered to play a game on a GENUINE FULLY WEIGHTED Jaques set, I could never even *think* about playing on that unweighted set.... I would have to graciously decline such an honored offered (see the above).  Nice set though!!

@Chasbermie: not all