AusBonsai

Hi Gerard
That is about right. I think there is a little leeway as to where to measure the thickness of the trunk. The basal flare does influence the overall affect so I often include some. The amount I include is relative to how much i think it influences the composition.
With yours in the picture I measured across where the base changes colour from dark to light. I got 11mm in my picture res then I got 142mm in height (from soil to top of tree) which gave me just under 1:13
Pushing the limits of acceptable heights. Nothing wrong with this but I feel you have to be extra careful/good to get things right at these extremes.
Mojo makes a good point about the thicker branches towards the top of the tree.
Hopefully you can grow out the bottom branches to fix this while keeping the top in check. The little kink in teh top seems a little out of place as well. Might not hurt to take the top down and regrow that at the same time?

I am glad you don't intend to shorten it the height is nice and should be retained. If the top branches are too heavy (hard to tell from the pic ) Then cut them off and grow new ones too easy. The curve at the top should disappear in ramification once your've worked on it for a while.
Craig

Gerard wrote: Is that 90/8 = 11.25 to 1

Well within limits with tall elgant maples
lower ratio than some of mine too

Nice tree Gerard