economical resource.
In-fill holes are not drilled with exploration in mind. They are drilled to fill in the gaps between known good holes so as to increase the number of good cells for a resource report.
Most often holes are drilled 25 meters apart. I mean the in-fill holes are drilled to achieve that, while exploration holes will mostly be on 25 meter multiples. In other words 25, 50, 75 or even 100 meters from a previous hole.
Hole 76 was average in $ value per ton, nothing wrong with that. While 76W1 was above average. So they are not to par compared to 49 when intercept range is taken into account, so what? Hole 49 was second best of all on that basis, however on a per ton basis it is average and poorer than 76s.
We can not have better holes than previous all the time.
Whom ever had a complaint about the three holes in the last report was not talking straight but was misinformed, incapable of making proper judgment, or plain bashing.
My lists in previous posts demonstrate it fairly clearly even for the geologically inept.
Sorry, no cookie.
