Essentially this says that #7 is aimed to get an idea of there the deposit is to the SW of #5. Hit it. Now #8 is undercutting #7 from the same location (get an idea of where it is deeper under #7) to see if there is widening toward the SW under #5. IMO Since by my calc's #7 hit the mineralization juct about directly under were #5 was set up at surface. Remember, the drill does not cut in a straight line over distance (rock characteristics pust it one way or another as the cut is made - thus they can only state the initial angle but cannot guarentee is remains on that angle or in initila direction either). The better the driller and drill the better the cut, but rock characteristics play a real big role. That is why on the results sofar for the contact points below surface where the mineralization was incountered vary from what simple geometry would suggest, not by a great amount but by enough to see that the drill cut wanders somewhat as it cuts forward.

Old Joe