Dan you did an excellent wright up in that blog. Gross is the only way to tell people what your buck scores. Even if my Buck hadnt snapped the one brow he still would not have make book. I kinda like the nasty knarly racks better that a more syemetrical ones anyway. Nice how you included the scoring history in your blog. excellent job Dan!
Exactly. Nets, are for fishing. I don't recognize "gross" score. If you ask me what my bucks score, I will give you the only measurements I am concerned with- GROSS, and, that is what he is ! Nuff said.
Thanks a ton for the props guys. I really and truly believe that the net scoring system does a severe injustice to each individual buck and shows a great lack of respect to the animals. Honestly, I can't fathom why anyone would want to take away from the individuality and uniqueness of each buck. The QDMA has a saying....."Let them go, so they can grow." Well, if we're going to let them go, why don't we give them credit for what they can grow? Personally, I believe that whitetails and all animals that grow antlers every year are truly amazing. Its amazing to me that some people would want to diminish a bucks amazing growth accomplishments in a year, just because he's not symmetrical and even. Like others have said.....I will always live by the motto....Nets are for fishing!!!!!!
A couple more guys have responded while I was typing my response and I truly appreciate that 99% of you feel the same way I do. One small favor......please go to the blog and post your comments. Not just for me, but also for the owners of this site. The blog section is a big deal and the more comments we get on them, the better. Thanks again guys!
Dan, I tried to post a comment when I first read it... it wouldn't let me. Kept getting a "callback error", it said. I'll try again.
Steve, did I miss something? Back in the '90's they required 15" of AB points to be recorded as Non typical. Then it was changed to where only 1" was needed to be considered non typical so you could score it either way. I thought that this was still the current requirements?
No offense Steve, but you being in the slim majority here doesn't surprise me. After all, you are one of the few staunch supporters of Pope & Young here. Again, please take no offense......its just an observation.
Dink's Buck? One should kill any buck they want. But, if its being scored, said buck should be given credit for what he grows. Giving a buck a net score is like calling him Corky.........it just isn't right.
I like the use of both scores. Yes a 150" whitetail is a 150" whitetail, but then again it is not. I've seen rather smaller basket racked deer with tines everywhere that would go close to 150", and I've also seen huge massive clean 8 pointers that go 150"....massive 8 pointer is a much more impressive deer although the gross advocaters would say otherwise. I think using both scores gives the best picture of the type of deer it is. For all practical reasons I use gross scores in conversations though.
Dan, like Greg I couldnt comment in the blog. I have tried twice and get the same callback error,,,thats why I pm'd you instead :D
In December when my brother had his buck green scored the P&Y measurer said a few years ago they changed It again. Maybe It's back to the 15 Inches like It was back In the day. All I know Is that they changed It and I had no clue until he told me. In April I'll get the scoop on this for sure as I'll be at the P&Y convention. Need anything there Greg? I can pick something up If you need It. Greg, After re reading my previous post I meant to say a buck could be scored either way NT or T as long as It had at least one Inch of abnormal points to be measured NT.
Trev, I hear what you're saying... I think for me it's really about the image. I can recognize a hass when I see one, and I do appreciate a monster deer. Perfect symmetry has little bearing on this, at least for me. I appreciate regional differences also. This is because I know for a fact they exist. I'm not against comparisons, but wouldn't it be cool if the comparisons were apples to apples. It would also be cool if the keepers dropped all their stupid little quirks (e.g. thirty inch bow and 65% let off). If it has limbs and a string, meets the legal definition of a bow where applied, and is handled by one primate or another, then all is well. I tip my hat to the gents who go the extra mile and actually enter their trophies in the various record books (thanks Steve, GregH). The entry fees do (to some degree more than others) provide additional funds for wildlife, wildlife habitat, and hunting endeavors around the nation. I think a person should keep his/her dog out of the fight if they're not willing to open their wallet. Without the funds and active involvement, a person's opinion really doesn't matter.
Not only has it lost its place, in my opinion, it never should have had a place to begin with. The founders of the net scoring systems were misguided and it’s a shame that such a poor, ill-conceived system has been allowed to make it this far.
I would estimate 99% of all living things in the beautiful world we live in are not symmetrical, therefore, deducting from an animal for not being symmetrical is asinine. Every deer league I'm in goes by gross score and it will never be any different. My friends and I think it's similar to the BCS Bowl system. Everybody knows it's a broken system so why not change it?
