Can a diamond with AGS 000 rating be a class III stone?

[virtue]

Hi,

I recently purchased the stone below and now have question about its cut quality.

Before the purchase, I have consulted the AGA Round Brilliant Cut Grading Chart on Pricescope, which put the diamond in the cut class 1B (depth 58.3-62.99%). However, according to Fred Cuellar "The Diamond Guy", this stone is a class III diamond because the total depth is higher than 61%.

I am totally bummed because I have purchased it based on its AGS 000 rating and felt misled that I couldn''t trust the cert.

Can someone please help shed some light on this? Also, what would be a fair price to pay for it? Thank you all. Pricescope rules!

Carat Weight: 2.71
Clarity Grade: VS2
Color Grade: G
Shape: Round
Measurements: 9.00 - 9.03 x 5.54 mm
Flourescence: None
Table Percent: 54.5
Total Depth Percent: 61.4
Crown Angle: 33.7
Crown Height: 15.1
Pavillion Angle: 41.1
Pavillion Depth: 43.5
Girdle Thickness: Medium
Cert: AGS February 2, 2006
Cut Grade: AGS Ideal 0
Light Performance: 0
Proportion Factors: 0
Finish: 0
Polish: Ideal
Symmetry: Ideal

 

[aljdewey]

Can''t help you with the price.....but you CAN rely on the grading report.

This stone was graded under the new cut grade system, and it scored 0 for light performance. Can''t do better than that.

Fred is full of what makes the grass grow. Do a little google search on Mr. Fred, and I think you''ll realize he''s not the best source for any kind of credible info.

 

[oldminer]

AGS O extends further in depth % than the 62.99 limit I set. It is an arbitrary limit, I''ll admit, but everyone will wanr you about the overly deep possible AGS 0 rounds..... Fred C> is not held is high regard by many here. I just don''t know him well enough to judge and have no feelings about him.

Others may chime in on this.

 

[whatmeworry]

The claim that as soon as you break the 61% depth level, the performance is akin to "stepping over a cliff" is pure nonsence, caca, garbage,....It''s a cute analogy but it''s garbage. Mathematically it''s garbage. You have a diamond that gets the best performance in a highly regarded scientific cut grading scheme that takes angles, tables, pavillions, etc into account. Who are you going to believe?

Look at some of the ideal cuts being offered by PS vendors. Do you think those with depths above 61% are frozen spit?

What does your diamond look like to you?

 

[JohnQuixote]

Dave, in the new AGS metric the 'weight ratio' requirement takes out 0s in the bottom right side of their charts unless girdle thickness is reduced. It's possible for some combos in the high 62s to make it, but they're rare and my impression is the highest possible would be 62.7 or 62.8.

Virtue, the 0 in light performance from AGS on your diamond is a good pedigree.

I've spoken to Fred C. He is an interesting guy. You can do a local search on PS, or google him as others have suggested to form an opinion.

 

[virtue]

Thank you all for your replies! I am much relieved now.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 7/5/2006 3:02:15 PM
Author:virtue

Hi,
However, according to Fred Cuellar ''The Diamond Guy'', this stone is a class III diamond because the total depth is higher than 61%.

Dave prefers traditional stone proportions - but many others have changed their opinions - run the stone on HCA and you will see that I like it very much. But Dave Atlas and AGA will not try to sell you a stone.
Fred is trying to stop you buying this stone so you can buy one of his.

Ask him to come and post here to defend his opinion - I will bet you $10 he will not be brave enough.

The stone has an excellent spread and unless there is an I3 inclusion it will be beautiful