What you say is correct...as it applies to a steeply dipping ore...

What you say is correct...as it applies to a steeply dipping ore body. However in the case of MAD 126, 127 the ore body being tested - MAD120b:X1 - is what I would call gently dipping, resulting in a marginal difference in thickness...

This would account for the qualifier contained in the relevant announcements of 25/10 & 1/11...

Based on the intersection angle of the drilling with the modelled ultramafic unit, downhole widths areinterpreted to be close to true widths.

Thus it appears the quoted thicknesses for MAD 126, 127 are pretty much true value. Otherwise I would suggest that your point has more relevance to MAD71 which intersected 17m of almost vertical section of remobilised body, resulting in a false positive thickness.