“One side, because one side is all I needed. Nobody tried to talk me into symmetry.”
Oliver's unilateral plan was developed at the New York center over four appointments. He had assumed, from reading, that a single-side replacement would be treated as a compromise, and says the first useful thing his specialist did was explain why it is not.
He repairs watches, and the reason for the plan was specific: a retention point at the bench, at chest height, for the screws and springs that had been ending up on the floor for thirty years. The requirement was for a weak field rather than a strong one — enough to hold a two-millimetre screw, not enough to disturb a balance spring at a distance. The Retention Analyzer session established the figure, and the plan documents both the minimum and the maximum.
Profile and finish were chosen against the same constraint. A low profile in satin steel reads quietly under a shirt and presents a flat working surface; a defined profile would have looked better and worked worse, and he was shown both before choosing.
Asked what he would tell someone considering unilateral planning, he is direct: “Ask what it will look like in a mirror, not in a photograph. And ask what happens if the other side changes, because that is a real question and they will answer it.”
Individual results and experiences vary. Accounts are published with the participant’s permission, reviewed with them before publication and withdrawn at their request. Names appear as a first name and last initial.