Guess who else thinks 60/60 is as good as Ideal- GIA!!!!

[diamondsbylauren]

http://www.diamondcut.gia.edu/

Please use the "Cut Estimator- the sample stone GIA uses is.....YES- A 60/60- and this sample gets GIA highest cut grade.


OK- start throwing rocks.

 

[sjz]

I''ve never seen a 60/60 stone in person. I hope I get the chance someday, they sound excellent.

 

[AndyRosse]

That is a cool tool!!

 

[strmrdr]

Where have you been?
They have been showing a 60/60 getting the top grade for a while now.
Dont mean much because no has said there arent good 60/60s out there but just because its a 60/60 doesnt mean it is a good one.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 8/3/2005 2:41:02 PM
Author: sjz
I''ve never seen a 60/60 stone in person. I hope I get the chance someday, they sound excellent.

SJZ, there are many 60/60 type diamonds walking about. It''s likely you have seen them. You can go into many mall stores and find diamonds at or around 60/60.

David, seen this thread?

 

[Regular Guy]

Yes, I did see that 60/60 was set as the default. Frankly, for awhile, I hadn''t realized why the tutorial here made the point about the relative irrelevance of just table and depth by using the example of 60/60, rather than 55/60, which I thought at least made more sense (and is probably followed as something like the default for other "quick search/no inventory" internet vendors who want to describe ideal)....

but then I became familiar with this 60/60 tradition, and understood better. Yes, David...diamond naive guy that I am...I understand those set of defaults are set for you.

Regards,

 

[oldminer]

The GIA has some excellent marketing people, but their not so revolutionary light performance prediction program may not be nearly as good as its marketing. To have a weak, or soft system, and to make it so a very large number of stones score "Excellent" defeats the purpose of having such a system at all, namely DISCRIMINATION between the various levels of beauty and light performance at the top of the heap where it truly is of importance.

There are a relatively small number of really excellent diamonds in light behavior, just as there really are only a rather small number of people who wish to pay a premium for super performance. It could be that there are, and always have been, truly fine 60/60 diamonds deserving of the highest, strictest grading, but there will be many more that don't, or should not qualify for that description.
My wife wears a 60/60, so I don't disagree about some of them being an excellent stone, but they ALL are not. Some are only so-so. We have seen this before with overly deep AGS-0 cut stones. Cutters figured out rather quickly how to bastardize the system to save weight. Judging diamonds by parameters is inherently a good screening tool, but a weak final system for choosing a diamond.

For the sake of credibility, the GIA should consider doing the whole process over again, take the time to do it right with better technology, and just admit that they went down a pathway which proved a poor choice. I sort of feel complimented by the apparent combination of my AGA Shape Selector tool with the AGA Cut Class grading Do It Yourself free tool that GIA has provided to us under "Facetware". It makes me feel in some small way, that I contributed to the effort to improve what we do..............even if I don't love the outcome.

One thing for sure, I spent way less on my appraoch and programming than the GIA did. For the huge difference in cost, the questionable difference in discrimination ability has my concern.

 

[sjz]

Date: 8/3/2005 2:50:33 PM
Author: JohnQuixote

Date: 8/3/2005 2:41:02 PM
Author: sjz
I''ve never seen a 60/60 stone in person. I hope I get the chance someday, they sound excellent.

SJZ, there are many 60/60 type diamonds walking about. It''s likely you have seen them. You can go into many mall stores and find diamonds at or around 60/60.

David, seen this thread?

No doubt I have, and never even knew what they were. But to tell you the truth, in most of the mall stores in my area, there aren''t a lot of well cut diamonds. There are a couple of fairly high end jewelry stores around here that sell very nice stones, but they want very nice prices for them, too...

. I was so glad when I found PS and the vendors here, because of the high quality stones at more affordable pricing than I''ve seen locally.

To be honest, since i''ve been reading and learning here, I''ve been out in the local mall stores and asking to see stones that of specific cuts and shapes, and most of the time, either they don''t have anything that I''m describing, or don''t even know what it is! I have yet had anyone locally be able to produce and ideal cut stone, or show me an asscher, or have anything like a brilliant scope report. Most of the time they can''t even provide me with a cert on their stones. Of course, they are willing to obtain one, for a price...

Most of the people I''ve met who are walking around sporting nice looking diamonds don''t know much about them, so I have to assume that they are either very lucky and were able to choose a nice diamond without having a lot of knowledge, or most likely were able to afford to buy from scource that was selling very good quality stones.

 

[diamondsbylauren]

Guys- You are SO missing the point.
IF you all do not trust GIA, fine.
Say so, and come up with another lab which might substitute for GIA.

I side with GIA. Wouldn''t it be cooool if they did this just for little ol'' ME?????? Of course they did not.


GIA does NOT believe that the so called "defective" cuts you are referring to are defective at all- just different.
In other words- stones that are "dissed" by AGS- stones that MANY people feel are lovely extremely well cut stones- WILL get GIA''s highest grade.
What GIA is saying, quite clearly is: There''s a range of table and depth sizes which produce GREAT cuts in diamonds. They are saying, again, quite clearly- that they believe a stone graded "Excellent" in cut is as good as an AGS 0- even if AGS claims it''s NOT as good as a 0.
Anybody want to bet who''s going to have more impact on this industry- AGS, or GIA?

Apparently GIA also disagrees with the use of "Light Return" measuring.
For those who still want to beat that horse, you''ll be arguing against what GIA is saying.
Again- are we looking for a new GIA?
If folks want a diamond that scores well on a machine, there will still be people offering such things- it appears that GIA will NOT use such machines. that says to me that the results are not meaningful to most diamond buyers.
I already knew light return results meant NOTHING to me- but of course I have the audacity to love Radiant, Asscher, Oval- all of which don''t compare to round diamonds on these light measuring machines- and what about Fancy Colors???? How would a Fancy Intense Yellow score on a light return machine????? I''m sure an RBC wil KILL it!!!!
i guess I''d better stop loving all these "poor" diamonds.

Storm: Where have I been? Buying and selling millions of dollars worth of diamonds- where have YOU been?
Seriously- Storm- with all due respect: are you saying you feel in a better position than GIA to say what a well cut diamond is?
Is that what ALL of the dissenters are saying??????

 

[oldminer]

Dealers will gravitate to the message they want to hear. I can understand that after all these years of knowing how pretty some 60/60's are, that it makes perfect sense that a system should acknowledge those that are great stones. I always have and so will ImaGem. So will AGS for that matter.

It will be a difficult path for new technology to be forced into disrupting the existing market, but I believe that is what will happen. I don't see GIA changing course. This change won't happen all at once, but momentum will build and all of a sudden, there will be a winning technology and several losing ones. The winner is not clear at this point. I hope to be here to see how it all plays out.

 

[Rhino]

Dave, you''re too funny. 60/60 is not the main criteria for determining if the stone is grade 1 or not. It''s the crown/pavilion/lg/star combo''s that are important (and even then there are some probs with the software as well). Here''s another 60/60 that gets 2 scores lower at a Grade 3.

 

[cflutist]

Date: 8/3/2005 2:41:02 PM
Author: sjz
I''ve never seen a 60/60 stone in person. I hope I get the chance someday, they sound excellent.

What the GIA taught us in Diamond Grading class was a way to estimate the table.

Look at the lines formed by the edge of the table, bezel and star facets. If it forms
a perfect square, then you have approximately a 60% table. If it bows in slightly,
then 57%, if it bows in a lot, 53%. If it bows out, then >60% table.
It is hard to explain, but we had flashcards with pictures of tables of different
percentages so we could learn how to estimate by sight. We also had flashcards
of crown and pavillion angles but I haven''t looked at those since 1989 ... LOL.

 

[sjz]

I should probably keep my trap shut, because I''m not an expert like you guys, but a silly girl who likes sparkly stuff, and wants a bargain on what she buys. That being said, I think that the reason most consumers are so taken with this whole idea of crunching numbers, high tech tests, and concrete documentation on stones is because #1. Diamonds are expensive, and we want to feel like we know as well as we can what we are getting for our money. and #2. We are afraid to totally trust our gut and eyes, because we feel we will be taken advantage of by the sellers.

Those of you who are in the business of selling diamonds like all of this science and technology, too, because it helps you sell diamonds. And you make your money that way. It''s pretty simple. If a method of grading or determining the value of a stone seems to help you sell your stones better, naturally that''s the philosophy you are going to support. Personally, I take pretty much everything ALL of you say with a grain of salt. That''s not to say I don''t trust the majority of you, because I do (have had no reason NOT to yet...

).

 

[JohnQuixote]

So, what''s the difference between a subject with 57% stars, 82% lower girdles compared to one with 53% stars, 78% lower girdles?

In this metric? There is no difference. Both are rounded to the nearest 5% (55 and 80 respectively).

 

[Iiro]

Date: 8/3/2005 3:42:30 PM
Author: Rhino
Dave, you''re too funny. 60/60 is not the main criteria for determining if the stone is grade 1 or not. It''s the crown/pavilion/lg/star combo''s that are important (and even then there are some probs with the software as well). Here''s another 60/60 that gets 2 scores lower at a Grade 3.

Heh, why settle with Grade 3 when we can have Grade 4

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 8/3/2005 3:33:20 PM
Author: diamondsbylauren

Storm: Where have I been? Buying and selling millions of dollars worth of diamonds- where have YOU been?

Seriously- Storm- with all due respect: are you saying you feel in a better position than GIA to say what a well cut diamond is?

Is that what ALL of the dissenters are saying??????

You are getting so defensive that your not even bothering to comprehend what im saying.
"Where have you been?
They have been showing a 60/60 getting the top grade for a while now."

See where I say:
"They have been showing a 60/60 getting the top grade for a while now"

gee I wonder if that has something to do with the question.
Or lets just ingore it and get all bent out of shape over nothing.
sheesh.

I have said a dozen times that Iv seen nice 60/60 diamonds Iv also seen some not so nice diamonds in that range.

That is my bottom line and if someone wants to say that all 60/60 diamonds are top notch im going to disagree with them just as strongly as with someone who says all 60/60 diamonds suck.
Neither statement is true not all 60/60 diamonds are good and not all 60/60 diamonds are bad either.

 

[diamondsbylauren]

Date: 8/3/2005 3:42:30 PM
Author: Rhino
Dave, you''re too funny. 60/60 is not the main criteria for determining if the stone is grade 1 or not. It''s the crown/pavilion/lg/star combo''s that are important (and even then there are some probs with the software as well). Here''s another 60/60 that gets 2 scores lower at a Grade 3.

Thanks Rhino- Most women seem to agree- I start talking to them and they say I''m funny ( looking).....hehehe


The example you''ve plugged in does seem to indicate an error someplace- the girdle in the pictogram is shown as extremely thin, while on the graph it shows medium- but I would say the example you created is quite like the 1.72 that I had the Sarin done on last month- a nice cut, but not the best.

I agree with Rhino - the crown/pavilloon/star combo is crucial in the look of a diamond- the diamond Rhino created on GIA cut estimator has crown angles which are borderline too steep- yet, this is an example of a 60/60 that would look pretty nice, yet not get an Excellent Cut grade- Good Show Rhino!!

 

[diamondsbylauren]

Date: 8/3/2005 4:06:04 PM
Author: Iiro

Date: 8/3/2005 3:42:30 PM
Author: Rhino
Dave, you''re too funny. 60/60 is not the main criteria for determining if the stone is grade 1 or not. It''s the crown/pavilion/lg/star combo''s that are important (and even then there are some probs with the software as well). Here''s another 60/60 that gets 2 scores lower at a Grade 3.

Heh, why settle with Grade 3 when we can have Grade 4

Iiro- please take a look at the side veiw created by plugging in the numbers you have Iiro- NO ONE that knows what a diamond is supposed to look like- I''m NOT talking about experts here- any laymen would look at a stone wit the angles you plugged in and ask- Is that a diamond???? NO cutter worth their salt would ever cut such a stone.

I HAVE seen really badly cut stones in my day- and they are quite simple top spot if they are as bad as that one.

 

[Rhino]

Date: 8/3/2005 4:49:33 PM
Author: diamondsbylauren

Date: 8/3/2005 3:42:30 PM
Author: Rhino
Dave, you're too funny. 60/60 is not the main criteria for determining if the stone is grade 1 or not. It's the crown/pavilion/lg/star combo's that are important (and even then there are some probs with the software as well). Here's another 60/60 that gets 2 scores lower at a Grade 3.

Thanks Rhino- Most women seem to agree- I start talking to them and they say I'm funny ( looking).....hehehe


The example you've plugged in does seem to indicate an error someplace- the girdle in the pictogram is shown as extremely thin, while on the graph it shows medium- but I would say the example you created is quite like the 1.72 that I had the Sarin done on last month- a nice cut, but not the best.

I agree with Rhino - the crown/pavilloon/star combo is crucial in the look of a diamond- the diamond Rhino created on GIA cut estimator has crown angles which are borderline too steep- yet, this is an example of a 60/60 that would look pretty nice, yet not get an Excellent Cut grade- Good Show Rhino!!

Thanks man. Hey... perhaps we are both a little funny (looking)

.

Don't take strm's comments in the wrong spirit. He's saying the same thing. There are beautiful 60/60's and then there are pooper 60/60's.

What we would *all* emphasize is to take into consideration all facets and not just table/total depth if we are to consider total face up appearance. That's all.

Peace out man.

PS: BTW if you're still ever in this neck of the woods my invitation stands. There's an awesome pizza joint next door too!

 

[diamondsbylauren]

AS IF Long Island Pizza could EVER compare to REAL pizza- like we have in Da Bronx!


( Now I am REALLY starting a war!!!!hehehe)

Now I may have to go to check out this challenge.
Thin crust?

 

[mdx]

I think you guys are perhaps a little Naïve, This GIA system I believe has nothing or very little to do with cut proportion it’s to do with retaining market share.

GIA while under pressure to include cut grades faced the dilemma of loosing market share as they have always been the haven of poorly cut stones hiding behind the credibility of a GIA report.
This system I believe is an attempt to please the cutters who don’t like the economics of better cut stones.
Why are they taking so long to launch, perhaps they know they will face a backlash from the more knowledgeable , It’s a gamble they may just win if they keep it too complicated for consumers.

Johan

 

[diamondsbylauren]

Date: 8/3/2005 6:56:34 PM
Author: mdx

I think you guys are perhaps a little Naïve, This GIA system I believe has nothing or very little to do with cut proportion it’s to do with retaining market share.

GIA while under pressure to include cut grades faced the dilemma of loosing market share as they have always been the haven of poorly cut stones hiding behind the credibility of a GIA report.
This system I believe is an attempt to please the cutters who don’t like the economics of better cut stones.

Why are they taking so long to launch, perhaps they know they will face a backlash from the more knowledgeable , It’s a gamble they may just win if they keep it too complicated for consumers.

Johan

Johan,
Interesting concept- but exactly who is GIA loosing market share to????
I see no credible challenge to GIA''s superiority in the Gem Lab business.

 

[RockDoc]

Date: 8/3/2005 8:00:05 PM
Author: diamondsbylauren

Date: 8/3/2005 6:56:34 PM
Author: mdx

I think you guys are perhaps a little Naïve, This GIA system I believe has nothing or very little to do with cut proportion it’s to do with retaining market share.

GIA while under pressure to include cut grades faced the dilemma of loosing market share as they have always been the haven of poorly cut stones hiding behind the credibility of a GIA report.
This system I believe is an attempt to please the cutters who don’t like the economics of better cut stones.


Why are they taking so long to launch, perhaps they know they will face a backlash from the more knowledgeable , It’s a gamble they may just win if they keep it too complicated for consumers.

Johan

Johan,
Interesting concept- but exactly who is GIA loosing market share to????
I see no credible challenge to GIA''s superiority in the Gem Lab business.

David - I think the GIA is losing tons of market share that it had almost a monopoly on during the late 70''s and 80''s.

Certainly you''ll agree ( at least I''d hope that you would ) that every stone graded by AGS, IGI, NGL, and EGL is a lot piece of business for GIA.

I have heard that since they started grading diamonds, AGS has graded about 250,000 stones. If there were no AGS Lab those stones would almost totally have GIA reports. I''m not sure what percentage of grading reports done by the other labs would have been sent but even if we surmise it is a low number and EGL and IGI graded over the last 4 years *( when AGS commenced its lab operations) 200,000 stones between them, and factor that by my 10% guess of these statistics and that appears to make another 20,000 reports GIA didn''t get to do.

With the average report costing about even a low of $ 50.00 because of the Dossier size diamonds, that still might equal 10 to 11 Million in dollars...

So I have to agree and side with Johan''s position here. Dave Atlas''s position is also well founded.

My take on this is that it is all a bit pre-mature to take any complete thought on the future. The Facetware software I think is an embarrasment. It is much too broad. AGS''S final version isn''t finished yet either.... So my thought is sort of to sit back and watch the results of the major league guys arguing over which is better, and how the trade accepts it, and more importantly how buyers react to it.

I think the one most meaningful terminiology in the GIA "stuff" is prediction. Much of the information isn''t reported, they claim it is considered, but there is not supportive, published methodology that proves this. When I think of the word "Prediction" I get an immediate mental image of a crystal ball.

Rockdoc

 

[diamondsbylauren]

Hey Rockdoc!
Of course I agree aith you- except: as far as AGS- well, of the 250,000 stones that AGS reported on, how many also had a GIA? I ''ve seen a lot of stones that do.
Still I see the AGS cut grade as great motivation for GIA to move in this direction- I agree that AGS has influenced GIA in this regard.

IN other areas, no. I don''t think the stones submitted to other labs represent a loss to GIA.
Large numbers of stones are submitted to EGL and IGI for quick, cheap reports to be sold in Zales or that type of operation.
I don''t see that GIA is really interested in that type of business- ultimately that''s where EGL and IGI may see growth.

It takes an hour just to submit a stone in NYC- they are that busy!
Maybe it''s that personal experience that leads me to believe that GIA is operating at compacity.

Maybe GIA is running scared of EGL USA, or EGL LA?
Or whichever one wins the lawsuit?

Seriously- does anybody feel there''s a real challenge to GIA?

 

[Iiro]

Date: 8/3/2005 4:58:15 PM
Author: diamondsbylauren

Date: 8/3/2005 4:06:04 PM
Author: Iiro

Date: 8/3/2005 3:42:30 PM
Author: Rhino
Dave, you''re too funny. 60/60 is not the main criteria for determining if the stone is grade 1 or not. It''s the crown/pavilion/lg/star combo''s that are important (and even then there are some probs with the software as well). Here''s another 60/60 that gets 2 scores lower at a Grade 3.

Heh, why settle with Grade 3 when we can have Grade 4

Iiro- please take a look at the side veiw created by plugging in the numbers you have Iiro- NO ONE that knows what a diamond is supposed to look like- I''m NOT talking about experts here- any laymen would look at a stone wit the angles you plugged in and ask- Is that a diamond???? NO cutter worth their salt would ever cut such a stone.

I HAVE seen really badly cut stones in my day- and they are quite simple top spot if they are as bad as that one.

Quite often young couples buy their first diamond without knowing how a diamond is supposed to look. I have seen, you have seen and everyone of us in trade have seen these horribly cut stones, they are out there. What is better sales pitch for this stone than 60/60 argument?

 

[moremoremore]

David, I am deeply offended by your statement

. ..... the pizza next to GOG is FABULOUS!

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 8/4/2005 12:27:38 AM
Author: diamondsbylauren

Seriously- does anybody feel there''s a real challenge to GIA?

Yes, I feel that AGS is a real challenge to GIA, but right now, that challenge only applies to the minority segment of the market that wants exceptionally well cut stones.

I prefer AGS stones because I want the cut information. Until GIA rectifies that, they are second-place to me as a consumer.

If AGS were to succeed in becoming more of a "household" name to the average consumer the way GIA is, I think they''d trounce them.

That won''t come, though, unless AGS educates their consumers as they go along.

 

[diamondsbylauren]

Date: 8/4/2005 3:39:29 AM
Author: Iiro

Date: 8/3/2005 4:58:15 PM
Author: diamondsbylauren

Date: 8/3/2005 4:06:04 PM
Author: Iiro

Date: 8/3/2005 3:42:30 PM
Author: Rhino
Dave, you''re too funny. 60/60 is not the main criteria for determining if the stone is grade 1 or not. It''s the crown/pavilion/lg/star combo''s that are important (and even then there are some probs with the software as well). Here''s another 60/60 that gets 2 scores lower at a Grade 3.

Heh, why settle with Grade 3 when we can have Grade 4

Iiro- please take a look at the side veiw created by plugging in the numbers you have Iiro- NO ONE that knows what a diamond is supposed to look like- I''m NOT talking about experts here- any laymen would look at a stone wit the angles you plugged in and ask- Is that a diamond???? NO cutter worth their salt would ever cut such a stone.

I HAVE seen really badly cut stones in my day- and they are quite simple top spot if they are as bad as that one.

Quite often young couples buy their first diamond without knowing how a diamond is supposed to look. I have seen, you have seen and everyone of us in trade have seen these horribly cut stones, they are out there. What is better sales pitch for this stone than 60/60 argument?

Iiro- the part of your response that does not make sense is this: If a couple has NO idea what a diamodn looks like, why should they be impressed with the fact a diamond is 60/60?
I have seen horribly cut stones- but has anyone here seen a 60/60 that looked like Iiro''s projection??? The really really badly cut stones I''ve seen , for the most part, were not accompanied by a GIA report.

One of the positive aspects of GIA''s new tool is that the pictograph shows ONLY a profile. This is a lot more accurate than devices that project what the top of the diamond looks like.
Again- I say that the "60/60" Iira concocted would be so utterly horrible looking that NO ONE would see it as a beautiful diamond.
NOt so with Rhino''s less extremem example

 

[Iiro]

Date: 8/4/2005 3:43:41 PM
Author: diamondsbylauren

Date: 8/4/2005 3:39:29 AM
Author: Iiro

Date: 8/3/2005 4:58:15 PM
Author: diamondsbylauren

Date: 8/3/2005 4:06:04 PM
Author: Iiro

Date: 8/3/2005 3:42:30 PM
Author: Rhino
Dave, you''re too funny. 60/60 is not the main criteria for determining if the stone is grade 1 or not. It''s the crown/pavilion/lg/star combo''s that are important (and even then there are some probs with the software as well). Here''s another 60/60 that gets 2 scores lower at a Grade 3.

Heh, why settle with Grade 3 when we can have Grade 4

Iiro- please take a look at the side veiw created by plugging in the numbers you have Iiro- NO ONE that knows what a diamond is supposed to look like- I''m NOT talking about experts here- any laymen would look at a stone wit the angles you plugged in and ask- Is that a diamond???? NO cutter worth their salt would ever cut such a stone.

I HAVE seen really badly cut stones in my day- and they are quite simple top spot if they are as bad as that one.

Quite often young couples buy their first diamond without knowing how a diamond is supposed to look. I have seen, you have seen and everyone of us in trade have seen these horribly cut stones, they are out there. What is better sales pitch for this stone than 60/60 argument?

Iiro- the part of your response that does not make sense is this: If a couple has NO idea what a diamodn looks like, why should they be impressed with the fact a diamond is 60/60?
I have seen horribly cut stones- but has anyone here seen a 60/60 that looked like Iiro''s projection??? The really really badly cut stones I''ve seen , for the most part, were not accompanied by a GIA report.

One of the positive aspects of GIA''s new tool is that the pictograph shows ONLY a profile. This is a lot more accurate than devices that project what the top of the diamond looks like.
Again- I say that the ''60/60'' Iira concocted would be so utterly horrible looking that NO ONE would see it as a beautiful diamond.
NOt so with Rhino''s less extremem example

60/60 has nothing to do with GIA cert. I am sure no one will ever try to sell Grade 4 60/60 with GIA cert. There must be a reason for that...
Anyway, 60/60 is meaningless argument, oh sorry, it has some value, some may sell horrific stones as good ones using 60/60 sales pitch...

I am not saying you are, I have no idea of your business or diamonds you sell. My only purpose is to show the weakness of 60/60 mantra.

 

[diamondsbylauren]

Date: 8/4/2005 2:15:27 PM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 8/4/2005 12:27:38 AM
Author: diamondsbylauren

Seriously- does anybody feel there''s a real challenge to GIA?

Yes, I feel that AGS is a real challenge to GIA, but right now, that challenge only applies to the minority segment of the market that wants exceptionally well cut stones.

I prefer AGS stones because I want the cut information. Until GIA rectifies that, they are second-place to me as a consumer.

If AGS were to succeed in becoming more of a ''household'' name to the average consumer the way GIA is, I think they''d trounce them.

That won''t come, though, unless AGS educates their consumers as they go along.

Hi Al- I agree- for people looking for an AGS 0 Cut grade, there is only one place to turn, AGS- and likely GIA''s cut grade will NOT change this.

I disagree that AGS would ever "trounce" GIA because the percentage of diamond sales which fit this narrow parameter ( that being, round, AGS0 Cut grade) is miniscule.
AGS has no reputation for anytthing else. Ever see anyone promoting AGS"1" cut grade stones?