----------------
On 11/24/2003 1:49:49 PM ChooChoo wrote:
The HCA adviser gave this 0.8 - isn't that too good for a stone that's not ideal?
----------------
'Ideal' is just by AGS0 standards...that doesn't really mean anything at all in terms of beauty which is what the HCA is trying to rate in my opinion. I have seen stones that are not H&A that are out of the 'ideal' standards of AGS that score .4 on the HCA. Just because the stone is slightly out of AGS0 ideal standards does not mean it isn't a knockout stone and it won't score lovely on the HCA. The two really have no relevance. I have also seen AGS0 stones score 3-4 on the HCA--in fact I just plugged one from Blue Nile in right now and it came up 3.3 but has AGS0 numbers. So the numbers don't mean everything
Also as the others noted, you just have the %'s here...those are not accurate--they are just rounded percentages. With the angles, the stone may score more like 1.5 on the HCA--still an excellent score. Angles are the best tool to use though if you are going to be using the HCA and relying on the scoring. Get specific.
The stone itself looks lovely in the picture. EGL grading may be off a bit depending on the lab, but even if it is and its something like F/G and VS, its still an excellent deal if the stone is well cut.
BTW that stone isn't in a setting, it's being held by one of those fakey ring holder things, you put the stone in it and then you can wear it like a ring to see how it would look on your hand. But it's not a real setting. It's like a tweezer somewhat.