Is there any reason, other than price, to not prefer the present day offerings of Jaques?
Well, leaving out price, their top-end sets are not to my mind any more accurate than the first repro listed in this thread. The pawns especially do not match the elegance of those in the original Jaques sets. You'd be better buying an original early Jaques set, which would have the added advantage of increasing in value, whereas I doubt the current sets will increase much, if at all.
Tell ya what... I always try and post good home pics of my sets that are not commercially enhanced, copied, or whatever. It's become obvious to me that the MODERN JAQUES sets are not actually owned by most cause I have yet to see anyone who has posted HOME pics of any MODERN JAQUES sets from their collection. If anyone owns one please post some HOME pics. Until then I'll reserve my judgement.... So anyone gonna step up to the plate cause I'd really like to see if the costs of the Modern Jaques and the specific carvers are the same or an elite class. Straight up and common sense tells me not all carvers are of equal merit in India. I would guess like any job some are much better than others unless they are robots... Nuff said...
If I could only have 1 chess set & my choice was Jaques of London or The Dubrovnik, The Dubrovnik wins at least for me.
9kick9 wrote:
If I could only have 1 chess set & my choice was Jaques of London or The Dubrovnik, The Dubrovnik wins at least for me.
---------------------------------------------
9... I love my Dubrovie too which I've made very clear... But, I've also had a deep down love for those old school Jaques. I think it's high time we find out if the Modern Jaques live up to the name and again I'll reserve any judgement until I see actual owners pics or have one myself in my hands... Show me people, just not internet here say....
I have yet to see anyone who has posted HOME pics of any MODERN JAQUES sets from their collection. If anyone owns one please post some HOME pics.
Here's a video and a Flickr album:
http://www.bestchessmenever.com/blog/files/jaques-of-london-chessmen.html
https://www.flickr.com/photos/milijonar/sets/72157629624360822/
-Izmet
Thank you Izmet... Now we're getting somewhere... and always love your vids ! The knight is obviously way off from the 49 design, but imho reasonably similar to the original Spassky Fischer set. I did a thread of my HOS 40th limited edition some time ago here as well...
The knights are the key to any 1849 future sets success...at least for me. The rest is more easily accomplished. The finishing and polish of the older sets are without a doubt much better than the current productions. Will the future craftsman and pieces meet the old school designs, craftmenship, and standards, I have my doubts... Straight up...just look at the belly of the knights of the old versus new. No comparison in this new world of profit margins... If I'm gonna buy one, I'll probably opt to get an old minty original Jaques which as mentioned by Andy will hold it's own... costly, yes... will my grandson be happy I did someday, yes.
Edit added... One of the reasons I elected Noj for my Dubrovnik as well. Very pleased... Thank you Izmet and GoodknightMike !
Added... Just saw this by HOS which I was unaware of till now... Interesting...
http://www.chessantiques.com/antiquejaques.html
Note: not sure if active cause it's Frank's name listed ???
While I'm at it I'll post this again... A pic of the knight in my older HOS collector set. It was Frank C's first collectors edition about 20 years old or so. My point of this is not to compare to a Jaques set but to point out older school craftmenship from India. One can see the finishing and polishing here that existed not to long ago as well...I think it's pretty darn good... Check the belly...You be the judge...
Robb, I totally agree not all craftsmen are the same. I have an old set from the USCF I think it was called the "pro" real ebony & boxwood and about 30 years old. The craftsmanship is horrid, so horrid I do not take it out and play through a game with it. Different weighted pieces, different size bases. After exchanging pieces for 2 months with the USCF I gave up and kept the set since my wife thought it looked great and she gave it to me as a gift, she thought I was being too picky.
What I understand on the 1849 set was that many minor variations of the knight are out there in the original sets. So who is to say which one is authentic, I guess it would be any knight that matches up with an 1849 Jacques.
On this past Thursday I was playing a guy in the chess club who told me a true story that took place not too long ago with one of your favorite sellers that will remain anonymous. He got the set and 8 pieces would not stand up straight due to bulging of the weights coming out the bottom. He took of one of the felts and found the steel weight all rusted due to moisture. Well he got his money back at the end but this goes to show you they are not checking the sets before they ship at the retail end. This person has no reason to lie as he buys many sets off of many of the dealers that I read on here.
Who here has the largest private collection ? I told my wife I would like to get a set from most of the countries in the world and she looked at me like I was nuts so I modified it to a set from every continent ?! 
I would only get staunton design sets . I don't like decorative/theme sets .
Also someone recently posted, I forget who-sorry, about ebony wondering if it became darker with age or how was it in modern sets not to long ago or something along those lines... Here's another pic of my HOS older set ( Frank C ) of the ebony. There are now, after 20 or so years of play, a few hairline base crackes, but only probably due to old school weighting which on this set was a very heavy triple. However, again I'm refering to the quality of wood used, carving, and especially finishing only a few decades ago... What I most of all would like to see is that same quality come back in sets... obviously my HOS from Frank is still one of my fav sets due to the quality that is even more apparent to me now than it was back then...
.
and here is the lable Frank did on my set ...very Jaques like at the time...
Sorry to be so blunt Y'all, but it is what it is, just one man, with no affiliation, being straight up, and calling it out. In closing, I'm not gonna buy, no matter how cheap, any more sets that are cranked out like McDonald's Hamburgers. I'll save my pennies, if that's how they turn out, and just buy the genuine article... No flames intended and hope to see that one new set that I can post home pics of proudly. Just a little more effort is required on the finishing and quality control.
It would be nice to get a certificate like the one you have above for the 1849 set coming out and possibly have it numbered as well. After all it doesn't cost that much more money and adds to the class of the set assuming this will be an exceptional set. Like you said I do not want a mass produced set either that people over look the flaws. I think every set should be examined by the person selling it regardless who sells it due to the cost of shipping and time to get the product. Very few of these sellers are also the manufacturer. As I understand it one place may pump out sets for 3 different retail internety companies. The House of Chess does brag that they are not only the seller but the manufacturer as well. After seeing their high quailty chess set the other night I may buy the redwood Zagreb set off of them. My freind has one and I will see it soon, he is most happy with it and the boxes this company includes with their better sets would sell for $75 stand alone.
Just to point out that the Jaques set Izmet posted is not their 1849 repro; it is one of their much cheaper models. I doubt many people here will have their topline sets because they are so expensive and collectors with that sort of cash would probably go for the antiques. However, you can see shots of one of their more expensive sets (the 1850 repro) on Ebay, where someone has been trying to sell one for a while. I think the knights in that set are as good as those in any HoS or other current or recent Indian sets but, as Alan Dewey pointed out, Indian knights have a different look to those from the old English sets.
Re your HoS set, Robb, from what I've seen of people's postings I don't believe that there's been a major falling off in quality since then in similarly priced sets. Based on the serial number, I think your set's probably circa 1997 or 1998 (or about 17 years old), so it's quite likely that the same carvers who made it are still producing sets for AIW now. I know HoS has received some comment about their customer service decreasing, especially since Frank Camaratta sold it, but people do seem to still receive as high a quality sets as are produced these days.
Some body asked earlier if there was a carver in America who could still carve sets as well as they used to be made 100+ years ago, and there is — Alan Dewey.
Hi, my name is Lou, and I'm a chessaholic. I used to be a regular guy who only owned five chess sets -- two wooden sets I bought back in the 70s, an HOS set I bought about eight years ago, a second-hand metal set I got at about the same time, and lastly, a plastic set I bought around 5-6 years ago.
About a year ago, I lusted after an expensive chess set that I couldn't afford. As the urge to buy steadily grew, it was getting harder and harder to resist the temptation. I still couldn't rationalize spending all that money on a single set, so I compromised and bid on a set that was about a quarter of the price. After I won the bid, I believed the devil was behind me. Not so, I loved my new set, but within weeks I was back online looking at more chess sets. To make a long story short, I kept finding rational excuses for buying one new set after another, ending just weeks ago with the acquisition of my 11th new chess set in the last 9 months! It's amazing how the rational mind can make up such convincing arguments.
I finally came to the realization that this was madness and, if I ever wanted to eat again (or pay the rent), I had better stop. I sold off all of my older chess sets, with the exception of the Ultimate plastic set. When the dust settled, and I tallyed up what I had spent on all those sets, I was shocked to find that I had spent $5 less than the cost of that expensive set I was so gaga over.
The result of my neurotic splurges was an immersion in the current market place, and in the current state of quality control (QC). In that time, I have dealt with six different vendors. Although I netted 11 new sets, I sent two sets back, and a third was such a disaster the vendor never answered any of my repeated emails. Out of the eleven sets I kept, EIGHT of those sets required the exchange of at least one piece (that's 73%). One set needed four new knights! In the end, I'm happy with all but the cheapest set, which was acceptable for the little money I spent on it.
The sale and manufacture of chess sets is a booming and lucrative business, and most of the 'tonnage' manufacturers can hardly keep up with demand, let alone spend time on quality control. It's cheaper for them to crank out the sets come-what-may, and deal with the problems on the back end. And guess who's the back end (the asses), you guessed it -- US! I'm not saying you won't end up with a great chess set. All of these manufacturers, with the exception of the one mentioned above, have replaced pieces without question, and in a timely manner.
The caveot emptor is this, if you want to be assured of getting a quality set...YOU'RE FORCED TO BECOME A QC SPECIALIST! So get out your magnifying glasses (if you don't have one - buy one), find a nice strong light, clean off your glasses, and examine each piece carefully.
Look for hairline cracks in the base. Most mfg's are using steel weights as they're cheaper and easier to use than lead. But because steel isn't as dense, the pieces have to drilled wider and/or deeper to accommodate the steel, which could lead to cracking. And the heavier the set the more they have to drill and the greater the risk.
Check the weights, are they flush with the bottom of the piece or do they project out causing a slight wooble? Is the bottom indented, do they rattle? On that atrocious set I received, none of the (rusty) weights were even glued into the pieces. Just a slop of what looked like plaster slapped on top. How does the felt look? Are they cleanly cut and centered, or are they frayed and offset?
Most sets are turned by hand. Do the diameters of the various pieces match? Are they the same height? Do you see tool marks or gouges? Are the pieces matched in shading and color? Poorly carved knights are a dead giveaway of a cheap set. After all, they can account for 50% the cost of the set. And does the quality of the carving justify the price you've paid? A dirty little secret about so-called classic replica sets -- the knights are not as intricately carved as some of the new fancy sets, which reduces their cost, yet many are priced in the same ballpark as those fancy sets. They get away with it because of the popularity of such designs.
The bottom line -- inspect every piece carefully, be fussy, expect quality and don't settle for less. Most reputable vendors are more than willing to make amends to keep their customers happy. They just don't have the time or the inclination to do the necessary QC before they ship. If pressed, most will admit that it would add 10%+ to the cost of the set, and, in a highly competitive market, no one can afford to give their competitors that much of an edge.
- lou
P.S. This is just a sampling of the 'quality challenged' pieces I've received over the last several months.
This isn't complete, since some manufacturers asked that I return the piece for verification and color matching.
Typical 'as found' conditions - straight out of the wrapping.
A chip off the old knight.
Maybe the pawns should come with little helmets.
Andy... Just a quick comment regarding HOS...I'm very content with HOS in that my 1997 set as you mentioned, and my 40th Spassky Fischer, and my Rii Bones are what I would call minty... But believe you me I went to lengths to insure that... However, thank you HOS for your very special handling. Also know obviously it wasn't cheap to accomplish, but in the end they had a happy customer... Same holds true with my plastic Rii HOS as I recently posted. One can tell from many collectors on this site and not on this site what they want. I think it's good thing and I'm sure all the sellers are taking notice. The silent majority I'm pretty sure are also on the sidelines listening. I think what all the guys are saying is when the seller posts a picture of the set you have for sale please send that one... For me though, I am content with my collection, not only from HOS, but from Noj, others, etc. Folks just wanna get what they paid for in good faith. That's all and have a nice day my friends...
Just to offer an opinion in response to several of the earlier comments, my favorite playing sets of all are the Jaques club-size (4.4" king) 1849 sets. They are almost utopian in terms of size, weighting, and "feel". Not to mention the historical significance of playing on a set that has witnessed thousands of chess battles over the past 165 years. The knight-head carving of the very early sets is so meticulous, and matches the horse of Selene's Chariot so well, that I think it's aesthetically superior to any of the Jaques knights that followed it. (Just my opinion.)
The Jaques club-size ivory sets were first manufactured in 1850, which I can say with near-certainty based on Staunton's 1850-April-06 Illustrated London News column, in which they are first mentioned:
These sets are near-perfect also. Ivory tends to be very nicely weighted by itself, so Jaques ivory sets were never weighted.
Thanks for the info.!
Is there any reason, other than price, to not prefer the present day offerings of Jaques? For example ...
http://www.jaqueslondon.co.uk/online-chess-set-leather-casket.html
Its a fine set other than price.! I have a close copy I posted here with 3 1/2 inch King. Boxwood & real Ebony. ! paid around 140.00 for it in the 90's from Legend Products.