OMG you can't be serious. A 24kg sample of +10mm gold bearing...

OMG you can't be serious. A 24kg sample of +10mm gold bearing material! The top size, 31.5mm? At 31.5mm top size you need at least 125kg sample to be even hope to be representative. To me it looks like gold in was assumed to be 0.78g/T vs recalculated head 0.93g/T or about a 83% mass balance ie 17% missing, that is more than 3 times the fines loss. If you wanted to do this properly you would need another 125kg sample just to establish the head assay alone. As such your feed grade assumption for this sample is understated. So to suggest that an upgrade from 0.78 to 1.2 g/T is misleading in my humble opinion. It is an upgrade from 0.93 to 1.2g/T or 30% with a 91.5% recovery (8.5% Au loss inc the fines) from a very expensive ore sorter. Think there are simpler and better solutions.