A resource model serves two main purposes depending on the stage of a project. The first is to provide an early indication of likely tonnages and grades at certain cut-offs so that decisions can be made on whether continued spending on the project is justified. The second is to provide a basis for mine planning, feasibility studies and reserves. Resource models are not designed for selection of actual blocks in the ground for processing. This is the purpose of a grade control model, which is created at a stage beyond both resources and reserves.Inferred, Indicated and Measured Resources contain different levels of uncertainty with respect to the accuracy of the resulting grade and tonnage curves. These uncertainties arise from three broad areas: quality of information, geological assumptions and estimation technique. This paper focuses on known problems with the ordinary kriging (OK) estimation technique. Resource estimates often produce smoothed block grade distributions with much lower block grade variability than true selective mining unit (SMU) block grade distributions. There are two main factors that are involved in this smoothing. Firstly, where the block size used for estimation is larger than the SMU block size, this will smooth the block grade distribution and move the grade and tonnage curves away from the true SMU block grade and tonnage curves. Secondly, and less well recognised, is that smoothing is inherent in the OK estimator. This also moves the grade and tonnage curves away from the true SMU grade and tonnage curves, even when the estimate is done at the SMU block size. There are a number of techniques, such as simulation, uniform conditioning and degraded search neighbourhoods that can provide a better approximation of the true SMU block grade and tonnage curves at the expense of individual block accuracy.This paper aims to explore the extent to which OK resource estimates designed to maximise individual block accuracy can differ from (an estimate of) the true resource at SMU block size in terms of grade and tonnage curves. The differences at economic cut-offs and above are examined. In some cases these differences are significant. Both the OK estimation technique and block size play a part in the differences observed. To do this we will examine a number of commodities and deposit types using real project data.The conclusion is that the current industry standard default practice of targeting maximum individual block accuracy (conditional unbiasedness) using OK at resource stage, without consideration or evaluation of the extent of associated smoothing at SMU scale, can lead to significant errors in fundamental mine planning decisions. This then has implications for resource classification if the classifications are based heavily on the OK quality without consideration of the true SMU distribution.CITATION:Kentwell, D, 2014. Aligning resource estimates with mine planning, in Proceedings Orebody Modelling and Strategic Mine Planning Symposium 2014 , pp 185-192 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).