I have to say that I find your discussions intriguing, and so I'm asking your advice on a recent find. I spent 7-8 months self-educating and looking for a diamond in the Toronto area, and my quest has brought me to the following stone:

It's a G, SI-1, 1.59 carats with the following proportions:

7.63 diameter (7.57-7.68)
depth 4.54 (59.5%)
crown 33.5 degrees (13.1%)
pavillion 41.2 degrees (43.6%)
table 4.62 (60.6%)
culet 0.8% (very small)
girdle 2.8% (medium)

Yes, it's a little spread, but when I held it and looked down into it, I was positively stunned by the intensity of the reflections from deep within out through the table. From everything I've learned, it seems to have very good proportions, with a bit of a wide table (but well within limits of tolerance). I ran the numbers through the Holloway Cut advisor and it yielded a 3.6 (very good brilliance, good fire and scintillation, excellent spread - which my fiancee will love). I'm dying to hear some expert opinions regarding the cut, however.

My biggest question is regarding the table. Just how much does a table of 60.6% detract from the beauty of a diamond, and in what way? It seems to me that the Europeans appreciate the wider tables, and that this stone would have fetched a far greater price over there.

Theoretically diamonds with smaller table (54%-57%) should have a few % better light return and dispersion (see http://www.cutstudy.com/cut/english/podrobno_2.htm )

However, you are right, this diamond has better spread instead and hence looks a bit large for its size.

The results show that there can be diamonds with better than Tolkowsky light return and dispersion.