Gamblor,

I personally do not think so. As an example with the grades/lengths you show above: 3.6m grading 358.56 g/t Au (10.46 oz/t Au), including 2.5m grading 515.98 g/t Au (15.05 oz/t Au)--"

Basically if you do the math you will find that of the 3.6 meter, if 2.5 m of that has a grade of 515.98 g/t, the remaining 1.1 meter will have basically zero gold in order for the 3.6 meter to have an average grade 358.56 g/t (2.5 times 515.98 divide by 3.6 gives you 358.3)

So to me this indicates that 2.5 m was mineralized material with a very high grade and the leftover 1.1 m was possibly barren rock. If the 1.1 m was of the same material as the 2.5 m it is a little puzzling to me that there was no gold in that part.

This of course does not mean that the 20 m section is not loaded with gold, it is just that we can't take everything for granted, and I personally am looking forward to the next report of widths and actual assays.