Questions with HCA for AGS 0 Ideal diamond

[t21989]

I just bought a 1.055 AGS Ideal 0 and I have 30 days to evaluate it. I don''t know if I''m doing something wrong in the HCA but the diamond
shows up way out of range for an AGS Ideal (showed up at 4.1, Good).

The DQD document for this diamond is dated October 3rd 2005, but it looks like an older grading report which has polish symentry and proportions on it and no light performance data. The information I read on this website says the AGS grading system changed back in May of 05, and I have seen AGS reports issued before October 2005 that do have the light performance data.

How could they issue this report and grade it Ideal 0 when it doesn''t meet their own guidelines and appears out of range on the AGS Ideal cut charts. Here is the data:

AGS Ideal 0, polish, symetry, proportions all ideal, Color G, Clarity VS2
Table 54.9%
Depth 62.6%
Crown angle 35.3 deg.
Pavillion angle 41.2 deg.

I am new at this so maybe I am missing something here...any help would be appreciated.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 4/7/2006 10:50:56 AM
Author:t21989
I just bought a 1.055 AGS Ideal 0 and I have 30 days to evaluate it. I don''t know if I''m doing something wrong in the HCA but the diamond
shows up way out of range for an AGS Ideal (showed up at 4.1, Good).

The DQD document for this diamond is dated October 3rd 2005, but it looks like an older grading report which has polish symentry and proportions on it and no light performance data. The information I read on this website says the AGS grading system changed back in May of 05, and I have seen AGS reports issued before October 2005 that do have the light performance data.

How could they issue this report and grade it Ideal 0 when it doesn''t meet their own guidelines and appears out of range on the AGS Ideal cut charts. Here is the data:

AGS Ideal 0, polish, symetry, proportions all ideal, Color G, Clarity VS2
Table 54.9%
Depth 62.6%
Crown angle 35.3 deg.
Pavillion angle 41.2 deg.

I am new at this so maybe I am missing something here...any help would be appreciated.

Hi Tim,

You''ve done your homework. The new AGS light performance metric is more strict. Under the new system that diamond would not likely receive a 0 in light performance, as it is a somewhat steep/deep combo. This is also why the HCA prediction was not superb.

The AGS is still offering the old DQD reports (proportions-based) as an option. This is because for many manufacturers and suppliers a sudden shift to more rigid standards is not easy to cope with. It would be easier for them to stop sending to the AGS altogether and submit to another lab that does not set the bar so high. Obviously AGS would like to avoid losing clients, so there has been a period of adaptation. Neil Beatty had a great recent post about how/why diamonds are sent to certain labs, in this thread.

I hope this explanation helps.

As for the diamond you are considering, the depth may make it appear smaller for its weight than it could appear (what are the mm measurements?). I would judge it with your eyes first and foremost.

 

[t21989]

John,

Thanks for the answer, it was very informative. Before I bought it I had assumed since it was graded after May 05 it would use the new standards. Makes things more confusing when there are two sets of standards being used at the same time.

The measurements are 6.51 - 6.56 x 4.09mm.

Judging from looking at it with my eyes, it looked very clear and bright but there doesn''t seem to be a lot of fire compared to some others I have seen....may have to go back to the drawing board on this one.

 

[JohnQuixote]

The spread is not bad. Use your eyes to compare/evaluate it in different conditions and do what makes you feel right about it.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/7/2006 11:23:00 AM
Author: t21989
John,


Thanks for the answer, it was very informative. Before I bought it I had assumed since it was graded after May 05 it would use the new standards. Makes things more confusing when there are two sets of standards being used at the same time.


The measurements are 6.51 - 6.56 x 4.09mm.


Judging from looking at it with my eyes, it looked very clear and bright but there doesn''t seem to be a lot of fire compared to some others I have seen....may have to go back to the drawing board on this one.

trust your eyes.
Even a diamond with perfect numbers that dont please your eye should be returned.
Then figure out why you didnt like it and find a stone that has what was missing.

not that it matters because your eyes rule but the hca has been found to be overly harsh on some combo''s that one would likely score in the 2.5 range when and if the changes are made.
Not the best but not the worst either.

 

[kevinyonker]

Judging from looking at it with my eyes, it looked very clear and bright but there doesn''t seem to be a lot of fire compared to some others I have seen....may have to go back to the drawing board on this one.

When in doubt...try, try again.

 

[Rhino]

Date: 4/7/2006 11:23:00 AM
Author: t21989
John,

Judging from looking at it with my eyes, it looked very clear and bright but there doesn''t seem to be a lot of fire compared to some others I have seen....may have to go back to the drawing board on this one.

Hi John,

Just keep in mind that seeing fire is dependant upon the viewing environment you''re looking at the diamond in. Direct sunlight or spot lighting are your best environments for making judgement calls on fire/scintillation.

Godspeed to ya on this.