interesting read from lunchmeat on the sangold site....if you like it tellhim so.....................

http://www.sangold.ca/i/pdf/2010April-GeoxReport.pdf

Rogers (1982) clearly substantiated the sampling problem in his analysis of drilling as an aid in ore definition at the Dome Mine in Timmins. Drawing on more than 72 years of mining history at the Dome and an analysis of 20,000 drill holes totalling over 1,215,000 metres (756 miles), Rogers states that:

“Diamond drilling plays an important role in the evaluation of the stratigraphic and structural features which control ore deposition. The main function of diamond drilling is to locate favourable areas of mineralization.

Needless to say, a great many significant intersections, carrying a wide range of gold values, have resulted, however, the term “significant” takes on new meaning in light of the experience of diamond drilling in a number of ore-type situations at the Dome Mine. Drilling through individual ore veins such as the Fuchsite Vein, or the Quartz-Tourmaline Vein, often intersect the vein structure; however, assays from the veins frequently fail to yield any ore grades. Similarly, drill cores through stringer-type occurrences, when assayed, fail to indicate the true size or grade of the ore body finally mined.”

Rogers further noted that “those who explore for gold and those who have the slightly less fickle task of actually mining gold have shared a common dilemma. That dilemma lies in the failure to relate the results of diamond drilling to a positive ore situation, or ultimately to reconcile the “diamond drill indicated ore” to actual ore reserve tonnages.”
Rogers concluded that, “the role of diamond drilling is paramount to success or failure in the “making of a mine”. Once a discovery is made, some appreciation of the size of the deposit must be understood before the economic viability of further development can be ascertained. To that end diamond drilling is asked to play its conventional role. However, at the Dome Mine, in the exploration and development of gold-bearing deposits,
diamond drilling results are often misleading when consideration is given only to the economic value of the drill core assays themselves.”

From his review of the Dome drilling Rogers further noted that 40 to 60% of holes completed through multi-vein gold structures and 50 to 80% of holes completed through single vein structures areas failed to return any gold values in excess of 1.7 grams per tonne in areas that were ultimately mined. The majority of this drilling were short, close-spaced holes, drilled from levels and sublevels to evaluate ore blocks that were planned to be stoped.

At the time of Rogers (1982) analysis, the Dome Mine had produced 42.7 million tons of ore and 11.1 million ounces of gold (Atkinson 1985), which is equivalent to 38.3 million tonnes of in-situ resource grading 10.3 grams gold per tonne (based on 10% mining dilution, 90% mine recovery, and 95% mill recovery).

Also, if one reviews the annual production and reserve information for the Dome Mine over its long history, rarely did the proven reserve base ever exceed 3 years of future production until the 1990’s when the bulk mining open pit was developed over the upper parts of the underground workings.

Clearly, based on the above analysis, in the evaluation of the geological potential of a development-stage gold properties such as the Hinge and 007, that is the focus of this Report, emphasis must be placed upon the tonnage potential of the vein structures, and a review of the overall hit and miss ratio of the gold intersections obtained during
the exploration stage drill program.

None of the great gold mines of the Timmins camp would ever have achieved production if a requirement of financing of the initial development had been to demonstrate 7 to 8 years of proven plus probable mineral reserves as defined in NI 43-101.