Opinion on the following Stone

This diamond could not be an AGS000. By definition AGS000 is:

* Ideal Polish, Ideal Proportions, Ideal Symmetry

* D Color

* IF/FL Clarity.

The Vendor might have meant that the diamond would be an AGS0:

* Ideal Polish, Ideal Proportions, Ideal Symmetry.

Which it isn't. Excellent Symmetry would discount the diamond from being considered AGS0.

For your reference, Nice Ice has a great page that discusses proportions in depth:

http://www.niceice.com/calculate.htm

I ran your specs thru the HCA. Disclaimer,.......... The HCA automatically assumes a girdle thickness of 1.2%. Slightly thick is greater than 1.2%

This diamond scored 5.1, Good Light Return, Fair Fire, Fair Scintillation, and Very Good Spread, with the comment of "Good - Only if price is your main criteria."

My $0.02 on this diamond,........... Keep looking.

As pqcollectibles pointed out, it is not an AGS000 because it is not D color and Internally flawless, however, sometimes people, incorrectly, do refer to a stone with ideal symmetry, polish and proportions as an AGS triple-zero, when really it's "triple-ideal," or AGS 0. If the symmetry you listed is GIA graded, than actually GIA excellent symmetry corresponds to AGS ideal symmetry, but regardless of the symmetry , the stone is still not an AGS triple-ideal because it does not have AGS 0 proportions. The pavilion angle is too steep at 41.4 degrees to qualify for AGS 0 proportions, so what that vendor told you is inaccurate. Below is a chart that lists AGS 0 proportions straight from their website www.ags.org:

Attachments

idealcut_web_large_3.gif (10.61 KiB) Viewed 24 times