It was a wide area survey. With samples spaced 1km*1km apart. If...

It was a wide area survey. With samples spaced 1km*1km apart. If you do the sums that means each sample is surrounded by 4km2 of unsampled ground. That sort of survey is only intended to define trends and the fact they hit right on top of an anomoly was just blind luck. With such wide spacing you would expect that most anomolous samples are not dead centre of the anomolous zone. In fact the probability is much higher that the samples would be from outer half of zones radius which covers more area than the inner half of it.

I also went through the many pages of samples and found no shortage of anomalous readings. The majority of which had very good Kambalda ratios on Ni to Cr.

In the image above the samples are spaced 200m*80m so about 62 times the sampling density. They are simply not comparable.