Table 2. Weightings for Holloway Cut Adviser
| Factor | Score | Exc. | Very Good | Good | Fair | Poor |
| Brilliance | 0 - 4 | 0 - 0.8 | 0.8 - 1.6 | 1.6 - 2.4 | 2.4 - 3.2 | 3.2 - 4.0 |
| Fire | 0 - 2 | 0 - 0.4 | 0.4 - 0.8 | 0.8 - 1.2 | 1.2 - 1.6 | 1.6 - 2.0 |
| Scintillation | 0 - 2 | 0 - 0.4 | 0.4 - 0.8 | 0.8 - 1.2 | 1.2 - 1.6 | 1.6 - 2.0 |
| Spread | 0 - 2 | 0 - 0.4 | 0.4 - 0.8 | 0.8 - 1.2 | 1.2 - 1.6 | 1.6 - 2.0 |
| Total Score | 0 - 10 | 0 - 2 | 2 - 4 | 4 - 6 | 6 – 8 | 8 - 10 |
The Table 2 shows the relative weightings allotted to each of the four factors. The uniqueness of this approach is it recognises the holistic or co-dependant nature of all of a diamonds proportions.
A summary example of total scores for diamonds with a table size of 56% is shown in the topographic chart (Fig. 17).

Figure 17.