It looks very like the 1856-60 label with the border cut off. That auction looks like it was three or four days ago.
Agreed - it looks like someone tried to trim the edges of the label, they are very roughly cut.
I see no reason to doubt the authenticity of that set.
I wonder how many people from here just bid on that: UKP1200, with absolutely huge (hysterical?) increments between bids
Was that the hammer price Greg?
There'd be ~28% on top of that for commission and VAT I'd guess.
Nice set though, looks to be in good condition.
yes, that was the high bid
HUMMMMM. You are right to be suspicious . While the BOX looks to be right, the pieces themselves look to be pristine. At 200 -300 pounds for an early 20th C. Jaques Staunton set of pieces, that would be a steal, but that is probably an opening bid... Either that or the set has been kept immaculately well, seldom used, or has been refurbished. It is hard to tell from that one photograph. IF you are interested you could ask for some better photographs, if you can not examine it in person.
The other thing you could probably do since this is auctioned by by Bamfords Auctioneers & Valuers, is to ask for a Chain of Custody -- ie who had this set, did it have more than one owner, etc. As an example, I have a HOS Collector Series w/4.0" King in Boxwood and Rosewood. Plus I still have on top of that I still have all the original paperwork. There is ZERO doubt who owned this set, or who made it.
The Brass Plaque
The Coffer
The Custom Board
The Board is a Custom Made Board so the Chain of Custody is rather limited. But since I had it custom made for *me*, I can tell you everything about the board and who made it, though I would really have to go dig up that information:
2.5" Purple Heart and Curly Maple Squares finished with Semi-Gloss Poly, while the Rosewood Boarder, Bloodwood Inlay, and Spalted Maple and Corners and Delimiter are finished in High Gloss Poly. The bottom is covered Black Felt, and has 4 Rubber Feet to absorb shock when I put it down because of my Parkinson's. As I said the board is a Custom Made Board. I made the board to complement the Rosewood and Boxwood pieces. *That* is a proper Chain of Custody of record (plus these pictures are now Public Record further adding to the Chain of Custody record.
If Bamfords Auctioneers & Valuers, can't and / or won't provide you with additional pictures and / or a proper Chain of Custody assume they are hiding something, and you might want to consider walking away. At the very least if this is an "Estate Sale" they should be able to tell you whose Estate they are auctioning.
The Chain of Custody is truly what gives a set its worth. If my name was Bobby Fischer and there was a proper Chain of Custody, even a really beat up set would draw top dollar, while a really well preserved set would add another $10,000 or more; compare that to a nobody with a 1664 rating, with a REALLY CLEAN set.
Now IF you are SERIOUS about buying a real Jaques Staunton set of pieces I would SERIOUSLY consider buying from here:
https://www.antiquechessshop.com/product-category/staunton/
All this guy seems to do buy and refurbish Jaques sets, thus you are getting a fully matched and refurbished set. It takes the guessing game out of what you are buying, and if it is REALLY worth what you are paying for it. You are not buying top dollar in a bidding war on Fleabay for a up piece of crap that YOU are going to need to restore -- more money -- and maybe need to track down a missing piece or two that goes with the set.
Buy a Jaques set?? Not me. I'd far rather buy a good reproduction of a Jaques set, and pay a fraction of the price; or better yet buy a brand new design of the Staunton Pattern from some place like the HOS.
BTW for the curious, as I understand it the HOS "Collector Series" was "inspired" by many of Jaques early sets, combining the most desirable traits for each of the pieces, and then combined them into a single set of pieces. They also introduced the use of alternate woods, other than just the Boxwood and Ebony, hence Boxwood and Rosewood as a combo. If you REALLY want to see some of where new chess sets are heading into the future see HOS Exotique Collection -- hell check out *any* of their sets.
BTW, again for the curious, the set of HOS Collector Series in Boxwood and Rosewood w/4.0" King, the Coffer with Brass Plaque, and the Custom Made Board (NOT by HOS), I think cost me between $1,000, and $1,100 combined. Because of the "Great Recession" I saved almost 50% of what I would have paid for the combined combo had it not been The Great Recession. At that time I recognized a once in a lifetime buy. It was buy then, or never be able to buy this set again. Today you will pay between $1,100 - $2,200 for just a fully restored set of Jaques pieces, and a set of high quality Reproduction pieces will set you back between $800 - $1,000 just for the pieces alone.
In hindsight that really was a great set of buys I made between 2009 - 2011. Today there would have been no way I could afford this truly luxury set.
It looks very like the 1856-60 label with the border cut off. That auction looks like it was three or four days ago.
Agree. That said, the Action House claimed that the set was an EARLY 20th C Jaques set. You now have a BOX with a trimmed 1856-1860 LABEL and a set of pieces the Auction House is *claiming" is "Early 20th C". which many claim was between 1910 - 1925. Unless I was an EXPERT -- which I am NOT -- on Jaques set's and could actually tell exactly what I was looking at and tell the difference from a REAL Jaques set a fake that is being palmed off on the uneducated -- which I can't - would *I* bid on the set?!? No way. Unless it was disclosed, the OLD Box with the trimmed label, that contains a "Early 20th C Jaques set" puts the whole sale into question.
Chain of custody? Hiding things? Get a grip. Even for an object with UKP1200 hammer price you aren't going to get a chain of custody in the real world. Its not a Picasso and its just not that valuable (wardrobes in that auction sold for more). Someone will have consigned the set to the auction, they got a good price, probably a surprisingly high price, a price driven in part I suspect by hyperventilating chess collectors here (how does the bidding on an object with a UKP200-300 estimate go: 100, 200, 600, 650, 700 ... ?). Bidding at auction is inherently risky and I can't see any misrepresentation of the set that the auctioneer can he held to account for when you make allowance for the amount of time that the auctioneer can spend on these things, their commission based on the estimate would be tens of pounds.
This auction house clearly has no clue about chess sets, hence the ridiculous estimate of £200-£300.
It is not unusual for auction houses to include nonsense in their descriptions. A classic is to refer to the Kingside crown stamps as the "Jaques Trademark". And I'm fairly sure some of these antique experts think these sets are named after a man called "Jaques Staunton".
With regards to the label - I suspect the edges were torn and someone thought it would be a good idea to tidy them up.
I've never been suspicious of a Jaques set, either in eBay or live auctions. Sometimes a set is advertised as a Jaques when it very obviously isn't - but I've never seen a set that has been made to look like a Jaques when it isn't. Having said that, I think it would be worth it for some unscrupulous person to fake a label - I suspect that there might be some fake labels out there, but Ive never knowingly come across any.
OMG!.....After seeing so many non spectacular,rather common looking boards,that baby really floats my boat!....Just stunning.
The set's nice too.-
This auction house clearly has no clue about chess sets, hence the ridiculous estimate of £200-£300.
It is not unusual for auction houses to include nonsense in their descriptions. A classic is to refer to the Kingside crown stamps as the "Jaques Trademark". And I'm fairly sure some of these antique experts think these sets are named after a man called "Jaques Staunton".
With regards to the label - I suspect the edges were torn and someone thought it would be a good idea to tidy them up.
I've never been suspicious of a Jaques set, either in eBay or live auctions. Sometimes a set is advertised as a Jaques when it very obviously isn't - but I've never seen a set that has been made to look like a Jaques when it isn't. Having said that, I think it would be worth it for some unscrupulous person to fake a label - I suspect that there might be some fake labels out there, but Ive never knowingly come across any.
General auctioneers have a brief relationship with what they sell, their expertise is spread thin over a huge range of things and the commission has to pay for a quick assessment as well as the auction overheads, its not much. Jaques chess sets are just not that important - the auction in question went on for three days and there was one single Jaques set in it. A place like Bonhams could apply a greater depth of expertise to a specialist auction, and fetch a higher price no doubt, but even so their focus is going to be on the high value sets, not the mass produced Jaques sets. When you buy from somewhere like chessantiques or from Tim Millard you are paying for the expertise, the cleaning, the repair and for the aggregation of products for sale. Something is wrong with the market when the prices from Tim Millard for example are less than the prices in a general auction (UKP950 example here that matches the description in the auction yesterday https://www.antiquechessshop.com/product/ref2057-jaques-staunton-tournament-chessmen-box/ )
The antiques trade on the other hand does not have a great reputation when it comes to adjusting the things that they sell, famously cutting down or adjusting furniture to fit modern dwellings and still claiming originality. I recall Alan D (I think) talking long ago about a set of Jaques name stamps that he suggested were being used to make un-branded sets more valuable, and some discussion of spare registered design labels from when he was younger. A degree of scepticism about what is being offered is always warranted. This blog ( https://pegsandtails.wordpress.com/ ) along with dealing with some lovely furniture now and then deconstructs anomalies in pieces, not all of which appear to be entirely historical. ( for example https://pegsandtails.wordpress.com/2018/04/27/picture-this-cxxi/ )
Quite a nice looking set has just appeared on eBay - no box though
This auction house clearly has no clue about chess sets, hence the ridiculous estimate of £200-£300.
It is not unusual for auction houses to include nonsense in their descriptions. A classic is to refer to the Kingside crown stamps as the "Jaques Trademark". And I'm fairly sure some of these antique experts think these sets are named after a man called "Jaques Staunton".
With regards to the label - I suspect the edges were torn and someone thought it would be a good idea to tidy them up.
I've never been suspicious of a Jaques set, either in eBay or live auctions. Sometimes a set is advertised as a Jaques when it very obviously isn't - but I've never seen a set that has been made to look like a Jaques when it isn't. Having said that, I think it would be worth it for some unscrupulous person to fake a label - I suspect that there might be some fake labels out there, but Ive never knowingly come across any.
General auctioneers have a brief relationship with what they sell, their expertise is spread thin over a huge range of things and the commission has to pay for a quick assessment as well as the auction overheads, its not much. Jaques chess sets are just not that important - the auction in question went on for three days and there was one single Jaques set in it. A place like Bonhams could apply a greater depth of expertise to a specialist auction, and fetch a higher price no doubt, but even so their focus is going to be on the high value sets, not the mass produced Jaques sets. When you buy from somewhere like chessantiques or from Tim Millard you are paying for the expertise, the cleaning, the repair and for the aggregation of products for sale. Something is wrong with the market when the prices from Tim Millard for example are less than the prices in a general auction (UKP950 example here that matches the description in the auction yesterday https://www.antiquechessshop.com/product/ref2057-jaques-staunton-tournament-chessmen-box/ )
The antiques trade on the other hand does not have a great reputation when it comes to adjusting the things that they sell, famously cutting down or adjusting furniture to fit modern dwellings and still claiming originality. I recall Alan D (I think) talking long ago about a set of Jaques name stamps that he suggested were being used to make un-branded sets more valuable, and some discussion of spare registered design labels from when he was younger. A degree of scepticism about what is being offered is always warranted. This blog ( https://pegsandtails.wordpress.com/ ) along with dealing with some lovely furniture now and then deconstructs anomalies in pieces, not all of which appear to be entirely historical. ( for example https://pegsandtails.wordpress.com/2018/04/27/picture-this-cxxi/ )
"Jaques chess sets are just not that important - the auction in question went on for three days and there was one single Jaques set in it. A place like Bonhams could apply a greater depth of expertise to a specialist auction, and fetch a higher price no doubt, but even so their focus is going to be on the high value sets, not the mass produced Jaques sets."
And yet even here in this fourms group, you would be lead to think thjat Jaques Chess Sets are the ONLY thing of value. You go to Fleabay and someone is selling -- allegedly -- a beat to crap "Jaques Chess Set" oftentimes badly in need of restoration and sometimes missing one or more pieces selling for outrageous prices... for one of those "...mass produced Jaques sets." And don't kid yourself, there is a lot money that can be made selling forgeries, just ask some of the most famous art museums in the world who found out that some painting that they thought was an original Gauguin, van Gogh, Renoir, and which had been hanging in their galleries for YEARS, actually turned out to be an EXCELLENT forgery. Now anyone who is a chess aficionado knows that there is a huge demand of one of those "mass produced Jaques sets". They would only need to go to Fleabay to see what one of those "the dog ate it and pooped it out" sets is selling for. Hell, manufacturers have gone to the length of selling "distressed" sets. Furniture likewise. Am *i* an expert on Jaques sets? No I am not and a I seriously doubt most people are, yet a good forger could probably easily take a cheap set make a few modifications, and suddenly you have one "Jaques set". Example adding a "Jaques name to the kings base and the kings crown to knights and rooks, is easily done by HOS and others now. And turning out a truckload of "Jaques sets" would be a hell of a lot easier than turning out a single Renoir fake. Only the trained eye of a true expert could tell the difference between and original and and a fake.
Now if I MUST have one of those "mass produced Jaques sets" then I buy it from someone like Tim Millard https://www.antiquechessshop.com/product/ref2057-jaques-staunton-tournament-chessmen-box . You are buying a -- more likely than not -- a fully restored set with the correct pieces that match the set etc., from someone who has the trained eyes and hands who can add his stamp of authenticity that the set in indeed a GENUINE Jaques set. Mind you one of his sets is still going to set you back a ton of cash, however you have the testament of an expert that the set he sold is indeed one of those "mass produced Jaques sets".
OK how else can you get such a set? You buy a REPRODUCTION. You have too many people who stick their pointy little noises in the air and say, "Oh, it is just a REPRODUCTION. I own the REAL thing". What they fail to say is that their REAL THING has been in many instances has undergone extensive restoration; you on the other hand have a NEW set that has not undergone ANY restoration. A set that will come the actual papers, the date it was sold, etc., etc., etc. In short a true Chain of Custody. Hell recreating Jaques 1849 set is so profitable that even Jaques themselves are re-creating their own 1849 set, and you are paying a pretty penny for it too. How are you going to be able to tell the difference between an original Jaques of London set created in 1849 and a Jaques of London 1849 set created in 2021? Unless there is some tell tale mark that differentiates the two sets they are BOTH GENUINE Jaques of London sets!!
This brings up the issue of owning "a piece of History". Let's face the truth Jaques sets by today's standards are truly horrible looking, and unless there is a Chain of Custody, as pointed out it is one of several mass produced sets produced by Jaques of London -- it short it is a crude looking chess set, no matter how revolutionary it was back in the day. Unless you can somehow tie any particular set with any given famous chess player or personality, given that it is just another set of many mass produced Jaques. Say I was caught playing Lasker with a Jaques set, it is still of very little value -- (though my vauue will rise because *i* played Lasker!) unless of course the set we used has a paper trail, then you have a Chain of Custody: Who had that set; who handled that set; who played with that set; etc. Think of it as a Crime scene: Chain of Custody of who handled the evidence, otherwise the evidence is tossed. If I with my USCF 1664 rating uses this set photographed, it has hardly any significant HISTORICAL value; if however if I with my wimpy 1664 USCF rating get photographed playing Magnus Carlsen with this set, then the set has HISTORIC value, and the price of the set, if sold at auction. goes way up. Why? Because even if Carlsen did not *own* the set, he *played* with the set, and their is a provable Chain of Custody.
Chess Sets as Objects d'Art. If you want a Jaques 1849 set do yourself a favor and buy a really good REPRODUCTION: It will save you MONEY; It will be NEW; it will be UNIFORM in APPEARANCE; and most importantly it will come with PAPERS. That set will be tied to YOU forever and it can be PROVED. Jaques original sets were CRUDE, they were hardly UNIFORM, and I suspect there is not a single original set remaining hat has not had at least restoration. Back in the day, Jaques sets might best be described as FUNCTIONAL ART rather than Objects d'Art. In short the only thing Jacques sets were good for was playing chess, and nothing more -- who cared if the chess set got chewed on by the family dog and then pooped it out?? Wash it off with some soap and water and put it back into play.Today's chess sets -- the really well designed ones -- are serve as both Functional Art, as well a Objects d'Art. If you don't believe me simply go over to HOS website and look at the various DESIGNS, WOOD COMBINATIIONS etc. to see the Chess Sets of TOMORROW, as well as the Chess Sets of Yesteryear. "Toto, I don't think we are in London of 1849 anymore."
Wow!.... Ipswich,my man!
You sure are passionate....and to go to that length in just keyboarding alone makes me respect your opinion,which has significant merit.
I hope there are enough folks who take the time to read this "War And peace" post to be influenced enough......I mean it as a compliment,since you clearly gave it much thought,as well as the time it took to post.
Quite a nice looking set has just appeared on eBay - no box though.
Aaaaaand... it's gone. $1000usd.
Keep an eye out for this particular stamp in any upcoming auction or Tim Millard's shop to see how much it will be flipped for.
OMG!.....After seeing so many non spectacular,rather common looking boards,that baby really floats my boat!....Just stunning.
The set's nice too.-
I am glad you like it. Yes it is fairly stunning. I created it to match the Boxwood and Rosewood pieces.
One of the things I like about the set: It tends to be self righting. I friend tried to RESIGN a game and went to "knock the king over" (with his underneath so as to catch it ) but the king self-righted itself time after time. I have no idea how much lead or steel HOS put into those wide bases , but they are really heavy pieces. I gave up trying to play with unweighted pieces a good 15 years ago, and I've tried a few times since. The ending is just the same: we never reach the end as I've usually knocked the pieces all out of place... which also explains the 2.5" squares. This 4" king looks proper on a square size from 2.33" to 2.5" It will also allow me to use a Full Club Size set with a 4.4" King which normally takes a 2.5" square.
Wow!.... Ipswich,my man!
You sure are passionate....and to go to that length in just keyboarding alone makes me respect your opinion,which has significant merit.
I hope there are enough folks who take the time to read this "War And peace" post to be influenced enough......I mean it as a compliment,since you clearly gave it much thought,as well as the time it took to post.
Wasn't me Mr Twanger! It was azbobcat who wrote the post you are referring to
Quite a nice looking set has just appeared on eBay - no box though.
Aaaaaand... it's gone. $1000usd.
Keep an eye out for this particular stamp in any upcoming auction or Tim Millard's shop to see how much it will be flipped for.
For once, it wasn't Tim Milliard who bought it! I know because the buyer just messaged me
Wow!.... Ipswich,my man!
You sure are passionate....and to go to that length in just keyboarding alone makes me respect your opinion,which has significant merit.
I hope there are enough folks who take the time to read this "War And peace" post to be influenced enough......I mean it as a compliment,since you clearly gave it much thought,as well as the time it took to post.
Wasn't me Mr Twanger! It was azbobcat who wrote the post you are referring to
magictwanger "War And peace" post
along with the curse of capitalism 
Estimate £200-£300!
Looks like a 3.5 inch set, I'm guessing it went for well over a grand.