In principle you are right, but how likely is it to find an 1850 set with numbered label in pristine condition? Luckily I am not into Jaques sets, but if I were I would probably consider this one. Having the restorations done should be a couple of hundred extra, but you would have a nice early set with a beautiful patina.
Reproduction and Real Jaques of London Chess Set
Sort:
@IpswichMatt - I have seen your entry on facebook and to be honest, I am not really experienced with Jaques sets. But taking into account the recent "run" on Jaques originals I think the sets with entered number are rare enough to attract high prices.
Jul 9, 2021
0
#4404
Yeah good point. I took advantage of the recent run to sell most of my Jaques sets. It will be interesting to see what this goes for.
I agree with previous comments re this set: it's dated around 1850/51, given that it's a low numbered set and the king has the "J. Jaques London" stamp instead of the later "Jaques London". And the label color and number both point to 1850 as well. I would ask the seller to see some better pictures, including of the underside to see if the pieces have any registration stickers. If so, the sticker would provide more detail on actual date. The price will definitely go higher, and given how rare these early sets are becoming, you should go after this one if you are a collector. Just be prepared for significant restoration work needed if you intend to play with the set, and pick the restorer well, as a bad restoration job would kill the appeal (and the value) of the set.
Ohh... that's a nice one. It's all about that "J." This chessmen set has been around since before the American Civil War. I hope the winning bidder leaves it as-is.
Nice set , Alan had pointed out years ago , It very rare to find early Jaques sets in prime condition , Has it's box is this not rare too ?
Jul 9, 2021
0
#4408
I'd have that set restored myself,but doesn't that take something away from the value,since it would be touched up?
That set is too much for me to take on but it is very nice. I love those knights. I would also think that a set in perfect condition would of course be more valuable than a restored one. However, a set in perfect condition would be nearly impossible to find.
magictwanger wrote:
I'd have that set restored myself,but doesn't that take something away from the value,since it would be touched up?
No, not if it's done well , Would add to the value , Most original Jaques chess sets have some form of battle scars & boxs that need TLC ,
Jul 10, 2021
0
#4411
Thanks for the clarification.I know that adding anything new to an old acoustic guitar decreases value.I thought it might be similar with chess sets....My bad.-
My 3-4k£ estimate proved to be even too low. Sold for 4.4k£!
Jul 15, 2021
0
#4414
magictwanger wrote:
Thanks for the clarification.I know that adding anything new to an old acoustic guitar decreases value.I thought it might be similar with chess sets....My bad.-
I'm just curious Mr. Twanger, If it was an old vintage guitar in perfect condition because someone fixed it up, it would be worth lass than a beat up one? A lot of times repairs are undetectable. An honorable person should explain what was done as part of the sale, but in many cases it would be honest to say, "I bought it this way, I don't know what, if anything was done." It seems like the value would be based on the known history and condition. And sometimes a 1950's guitar had a repair done in 1956, so is that ok if the repair is vintage also?
Jul 15, 2021
0
#4415
You're right and I agree,but there have been times when adding something new decreased value.
No argument here,based on your observation.
Can you even get a half decent original Jacques set now without spending thousands of £?
Jul 17, 2021
0
#4418
Remember JAQUES invented Staunton, so every tournament set now originated with JAQUES, and the amount of companies making copies of there sets is a compliment indeed, the early sets are works of art, many wealthy collectors realise this, hence a beat up 1850 set went for £4400, the later ones not so much as the quality dropped, so thats why a great 1920 set is a third of a beat up 1850 set!
Jul 18, 2021
0
#4419
4400 Pounds for a beat up set?!? And several hundred more to have it refurbished. And for a set that is only 3 inches tall... and unweighted?!? I guess if you have the money it might be worth it, that said, I'd rather spend a fraction of that money and buy a full 4.4" Club Sized 1849 fully weighted set from HOS. Indeed HOS produces sets that are so exact they could pass for a TRUE 1849 set... minus the smell, stains, cracks, chips, etc. of a Jaques made set. The set the guy who spent 4400 + pounds on will sit in some place and probably never be used; the full Club sized Weighted set made by HOS will be used, though I'd probably would not want to use that in Blitz.
azbobcat wrote:
4400 Pounds for a beat up set?!? And several hundred more to have it refurbished. And for a set that is only 3 inches tall... and unweighted?!? I guess if you have the money it might be worth it, that said, I'd rather spend a fraction of that money and buy a full 4.4" Club Sized 1849 fully weighted set from HOS. Indeed HOS produces sets that are so exact they could pass for a TRUE 1849 set... minus the smell, stains, cracks, chips, etc. of a Jaques made set. The set the guy who spent 4400 + pounds on will sit in some place and probably never be used; the full Club sized Weighted set made by HOS will be used, though I'd probably would not want to use that in Blitz.
That may be so, but the guy who just bought the old set will sell it perhaps in a few years for over 5000 pounds. Or who knows how much. Try selling a HoS set with profit....
Thanks @EfimLG47, I wrote on the Staunton Chess set facebook page that I thought 1870 was wrong. I also guessed £2000 which is much lower than your estimate - are these "entered number" sets really rare then? I've seen a few come up on eBay over the years.