What do the numbers 36::24::36 mean to you? ...... no doubt vital statistics of a well proportioned figure. Of course we could make the measurements in feet instead of inches giving 3::2::3 and while not being so recognisable the proportions would still be identical. We can in fact change the unit of measurement or we can rescale the sizes (providing the same operation is performed to all the sizes) and the ratios and proportions remain inviolate. If we apply this 3::2::3 pattern to an auricula pip a match can be found with part of Glenny's definition of the ideal auricula.

One property of the Fibonacci series is that as the numbers get larger the ratio of adjacent terms gets closer to the Golden Number (1.618) and so the terms are approximately in continuous golden proportion and may be deemed aesthetically good.
If we choose a pattern based on the Golden number of 1.618::1::1.618 the sizes obtained 1, 1.618, 2.618 and 4.236 are in exact continuous proportion and can be considered aesthetically excellent.
The Glenny tube is 25% of the pip and the tube defined as above based on the Golden ratio is a little smaller at 23.6% of the pip.

The proposition is simply that a flower is well proportioned if the zones, singly and in combination, form long sequences of sizes that are in continuous proportion.

There are only four cases where two concentric circles demonstrate good aesthetics by having sizes in continuous proportion.

From the first three cases above we can generate additional concentric circles that have diameters in continuous proportion with existing circles.

These values for cases exhibiting continuous proportion do not differ radically from the traditional standards and suggest that intermediate tube sizes (between Glenny and Maddock) are quite acceptable as are somewhat smaller centres and grounds. The table below shows the Euclidean Distances (standardised on a distance of 1 from Glenny to Maddock) between the different configurations and implies that Glenny is nearer to the cases of continuous proportion than Maddock.

There are of course many other possibilities and the "rigidly defined" florist standards based on tradition, even if there is "uncertainty" over which florist is best, will probably remain sacrosanct. Maybe the answer is to build a mighty computer (as in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy) to define what is the perfect standard? So beware "Deep Thought" is under construction and its algorithms are being programmed.

Self

Self

Stripe

Alpine

The pattern 49::37::28::37::49 gives the sizes 28, 37, 49, 65, 86, 114, 151 and 200. These are in near continuous proportion with common ratio of 1.325 (the Plastic Number discovered in 1928 by Dom Hans Van Der Laan).
The Plastic Number is the root of the equation x³ - x -1 = 0. 
This obviously post dates Maddock or Glenny. Who knows how the old florists would have defined the perfect auricula given the benefits our current knowledge and technology? A remarkably long neat series, using 8 of the 9 possible sizes, and works only for three concentric circles with their inherent symmetry. There seems to be parallels between the use of the Golden Number for two dimensional geometry and two concentric circles and with the use of the Plastic Number for three dimensional geometry and three concentric circles.
The above gives tube and centre diameter sizes of 14% and 51% of the pip.

An auricula flower is not quite as simple as just a few concentric circles. There are the effects of feathering of the ground with the edge and the visual impact of the thrum to take into account.

To illustrate this consider Case-3 that has a maximum ground radius of 70.7% of the pip radius with (due to feathering) a maximum leaf-like edge size of 35.3% of the pip radius and a thrum that at least allows the observer to gauge the exact centre of the tube. The patterns below show the tube (size 2) split into a 1::1 pattern as well as a ground of size 0.828 and a leaf-like edge of size 1.414 with a total size of only 2 due to feathering.