Ace is retarded and should not be taken for an adult. He spams all
over the web presenting himself as an expert on all things.

The diopter values make sense. Newsgroups are the gutter of the internet and
you'll find novices who insist on murking up the answers to every question
posted.

-3.00 means you're nearsighted.

+1.00 means you're slightly presbyopic, about 40-41 years old, and can't see
well at normal reading distances WITH your glasses on. If you want to see up
close, WITH your glasses, they have to be "reduced" by +1.00 D, to -2.00.
With -2.00 glasses, you'd see very well up close. -2.00 is blurry far away,
but there's no way 'round that.

Bifocals simply provide -3.00 in the top half with -2.00 in the bottom half.

Using +1.00 reading glasses would work fine, if you could wear both -3.00
and +1.00 at the same time. -3.00 + 1.00 = -2.00

WITHOUT your glasses wearing +1.00 simply makes you effectively MORE
nearsighted, i.e. -4.00.

Yours is a simple and cost-effective solution, but it requires you to get
closer to your work than most people want to be.

-2.00 would allow you to see well beyond arm's reach without straining
closer up. You might still remove your glasses to take out a splinter.
That's the biggest advantage of being nearsighted.

-MT

What I'm guessing is your Rx, written conventionally, would be

R. -3.00
L. -3.00

ADD
R. +1.00
L. +1.00

This is understood by everyone in the industry to be -3.00 at distance
and -2.00 at near (the arithmetic sum of the two).

Written as two separate Rxs, there would be no "add" and the near Rx
would simply be

R. -2.00
L. -2.00

or if you really needed a +4.00 add like your post almost suggests,

R. +1.00
L. +1.00

and the combo (multifocal) Rx would have been written as the first one
above with  +4.00  in place of the +1.00s.

clear as mud?

w.stacy, o.d.