Hi John, thanks for your info.
The info I report is based on Gilles data conclusions.... now to say the word "impossible" fair and clear, as I previsouly conceeded, might not be 100% accurate.
Your example is good- shows that some oddities happen- which also shows the limitations in nailing everything perfect- I appreciate you bringing that up.
Now, there is something I want to point out:
Single note replacements are notes found with front and back position numbers different from the brick they were found in. If the position numbers matched, it is indicative of a sheet replacement.
This is correct, but only to a degree - the case where it would not work out is when either the mother ream of notes or the Replacement note's ream, were part of the mini matrices.
At first I thought yours were one of these special situations, but after writing up a big response I realized they weren't
.
The info you have is with Gilles, and if in combination with the other data the sheet replacement conclusion was made, then that is beyond what I have access to.
The one thing that is certain, 100% is that the REAM of BEY in question is exactly
2,900,000 -
2,940,000.
Supposing that the data showed sheet replacements, then this would be the replacement size.
So, I see your point.... and perhaps there was an oversight
(I don't know). I guess this is why we need people to be on top of this.
Either way you look at it, those BEY you mention show exactly what you say. I would be interested in knowing the rest of the data for BEY replacement finds between 2900-2940.
Is there a way you can get this from GP?
Thanks again-
H