Back in the 80's people used to publish indicated widths and true widths based upon the angle of the hole and the angle of the intercept of the mineralization. You can estimate a width from this information but it is far from 'true'. Most deposits swell, contract, twist, turn, fold over on each other so calculating a true width from the intercept angle is going to be very inaccuarte. Being 20% inaccuaret on a $5 billion deposit would be plus or minus $1 billion. The 43-101 rule put a stop to that.

43-101 rules require that an independent resources calulation be done before a company can talk about the width of the deposit. Up until then they talk about intercepts. To do a resources calculation requires enough intercepts to satisfy the geostatiscan as to being able to realiably model the deposit. The more variation within and beteen holes in the deposit in terms of mineralization, intercept lengths, location of mineralization, etc, the higher the density of holes that is required to get that 'reliability'.

Even when they publish the 43-101 they are still talking about indicated True Widths. It won't be until they mine it that they know the actual 'True Width' .

... Been There