I had not noticed these details in the second announcement. I...

I had not noticed these details in the second announcement. I did some analysis and if you exclude the bookends with 0% spod:

hole 202 - had an interval of 38m @ 0.97% in comparison and the visible spod table indicated a length of 29.3m (ie it under estimated the length of the Li). The same for the other smaller interval in hole 202. That is a reasonably good correlation between visible spod interval and assay result interval

Hole 205 - corresponding figures are 13.1 and 5 - a poorcorrelation between visible spod interval and assay results

Hole 206 - 21.6 vs 6.6m - poor correlation; 76.2 vs 54.4m - Okay correlation

Hole 207 - 23.8 Vs 0.5m - very poor correlation

Hole 208 - 53.0 vs 52.1 and 106.1 vs 105 - excellent correlation

The longer intervals of visible spod seem to have better correlation to actual assay intervals but not the smaller intervals.

For the holes without assays the visible intervals are (excluding the bookends of 0% spod) for the bigger intervals are (soem holes have additioanl shorter intervals):

Hole 209 - 58m
Hole 210 - 52.5m and 62.3m
Hole 211 - 82.3m
Hole 214 - 90.1m
Hole 215 - 113.5m

If the assay results for holes 209-211, 214 and 215 correlate reasonably well to the visible spod intervals then AZS will have fantastic results - the results for these holes may come out in 2 weeks.