I just started bowhunting almost 3 years ago now. When I started reading about scoring bucks I couldn't believe that they took away from the rack for not being symmetrical. It made no sense to me at all, and this was from someone who at the time had never even harvested a whitetail deer. I am a firm believer that if they grow it it, it counts. Gross all the way!!!! Dan, I tried to post on the blog also, but got the same error message as a few of the other members.
With all this being said and every inch of Antler should be counted at the same time should we do away with measuring the spread? We are only actually measuring space after all. T
Frankly I never understood penalizing a buck for antler growth. IMHO if he grew it you should count it! I think it is an outdated method and many Bucks are not given the credit they deserved because of this manmade scoring system. Dan
Trevor, A mentor of mine once told me to not worry so much about score and if I thought something would look good on the wall, then it would Look Good! I have found that to be true! Dan
Most of here are men, so we naturally choose the larger measurement. I have never had a buck's rack measured. Nevermind the fact that I have never shot one I felt was worthy of being measured.
I really belive that using a net score is a joke and really degrades the animals that we work so hard to hunt. Every inch of any animal antler should be counted. When they measure fish it's the total length. So those deduction for abnormal points are an insult. I would never see a persons deer and say " well what did he net" . I want to hear the story behind the hunt. Deductions are like a curve in grading for the people who dont try hard enough in school.
I asked eariler the question what about measuring the spread should we count this as we are only measuring space or distance. Sidenote: Back in the day when hunting especially at camps if we seen a buck we would pretty much describe at as the following: Hey brother we seen a Huge 10 pointer and he had to have a 19 inch spread and had to weight 200lbs. We never talked about how he would score.
Tony, IMO Spread can make a buck look that much more impressive, and it's only counted once. It seems the Bucks I kill are usually pretty narrow, even though scores are in the 140's, & 150's. If I were to kill a Big Ol' Buck that was 24" inside. I'd sure wanna count it! but I do understand the just measuring air point of view. Dan
I like counting the spread and I totally agree with you I was just throwing it out there. *Trouble maker in a nice way* lol
does'nt p&y count inside and outside spread? But yet it can only equal and not exceed the longest main beam. Again horse ****. I can't measure that way when I build people house lmao. Oh but wait they do you are'nt taxed on liveable sqft. you are taxed on total sqft.
Yeah, spread should be a factor. In consideration of the JZ scoring system, total displacement doesn't tell the whole story. Spread is certainly part of that story. For example, "the buck displaced x amount of water but had zero spread". Does that paint a picture? Yes. the deer had a single mass of antler on his head.
It has lost it's place, Let's give them credit for what they grew. kind of like the 65 percent letoff that bow companys has long since aborted, not that there are not a few left in the market it is not the norm.
Although I support Pope and Young, I agree with most everyone that what is actually there should be counted. But if we are to use gross score as a way of measuring for a record book, the bar would have to be raised for entrance.
If the P & Y and B & C clubs would both list the gross score along with the net score, I'd be fine with that. It should solve all the problems. Everyone would be able to see exactly how big the deer was.
Only problem with this is that they don't even let you in unless "their Net" is met...correct? Also agree with Cougmag comment - if gross only - the minimum would need raised...or regional minimum set much like Will discussed. I don't ever care to hear what a deer "Nets"...Gross tells me what I'm looking for...
One thing to consider...If "gross" was the only score that counted.. All big Nontypicals would rule the record books. The clean HUGE typicals would fall well short of all the giant Nontypicals. Giant NTs gross over 300.. Giant Clean Typicals.. gross over 200... I am fine with this.. but many wouldnt be..
Doesn't matter to me if a buck I shoot would make it in the books anyway. I just use the scoring systems as something to go by. I'll never enter a deer. But I do think nets are for fish :D
