|
|
Post by M4Madness on Dec 4, 2014 11:09:09 GMT -5
The other thread got me to thinking, and perhaps we all mean the same thing with just different ways of wording it. So I figure I'll ask this here:
You have a buck that grosses 150" but nets 145". Now let's say that the buck has suddenly grown a 10" droptine on each side. What will it now gross and net?
|
|
|
|
Post by M4Madness on Dec 4, 2014 11:11:54 GMT -5
I guess I should add that I say it will still gross 150" but will now only net 125" in the typical class.
|
|
|
|
Post by schall53 on Dec 4, 2014 11:16:32 GMT -5
GROSS 170
NON TYPICAL NET 165
TYPICAL NET 125
|
|
|
|
Post by lawrencecountyhunter on Dec 4, 2014 11:20:41 GMT -5
^^ Agree
|
|
|
|
Post by M4Madness on Dec 4, 2014 11:20:47 GMT -5
I guess I should have specified gross and net in TYPICAL class. :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Dec 4, 2014 11:31:56 GMT -5
GROSS 170 NON TYPICAL NET 165 TYPICAL NET 125 ^^^^ THIS |
|
|
|
Post by M4Madness on Dec 4, 2014 11:37:50 GMT -5
The point I am trying to make is that when I called the score after side-to-side deductions BUT BEFORE abnormals are subtracted "net", I'm told that I made up my own term. But it's okay to add the abnormals to the gross score and still call it "gross"? The gross score does not include abnormal points.
That said, I also call everything that the buck grew "gross", even though it technically is not.
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Dec 4, 2014 11:53:29 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by M4Madness on Dec 4, 2014 12:06:47 GMT -5
Yep, at no time are abnormal points ADDED into a typical gross score.
Subtracting them from either gross or net subtotal scores results in the same final net score.
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Dec 4, 2014 12:16:44 GMT -5
Yep, at no time are abnormal points ADDED into a typical gross score. Subtracting them from either gross or net scores results in the same final net score. But I'll bet 99 out of 100 deer hunters do use every inch of antler when saying "gross score".. They add it all up and that is theirs/ours/my gross score. |
|
|
|
Post by M4Madness on Dec 4, 2014 12:18:46 GMT -5
But I'll bet 99 out of 100 deer hunters do use every inch of antler when saying "gross score".. They add it all up and that is theirs/ours/my gross score. Most certainly, and so do I. But by strict B&C definition, there are only gross and net. |
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on Dec 4, 2014 12:19:55 GMT -5
I have never been a fan of the scoring system and every time it comes up it does nothing but reinforce my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by M4Madness on Dec 4, 2014 12:22:22 GMT -5
Buckmasters would have the perfect system if they would use the inside spread.
|
|
|
|
Post by parrothead on Dec 4, 2014 12:40:16 GMT -5
We need to get some pics posted of some deer and not have the scores listed and let people guess scores. Of course we need to know the scores ahead of time.
|
|
|
|
Post by M4Madness on Dec 4, 2014 12:55:23 GMT -5
We need to get some pics posted of some deer and not have the scores listed and let people guess scores. Of course we need to know the scores ahead of time. I've seen threads like that on ArcheryTalk, and a 150" buck will be posted and scores will range from 100" to 200". Lol! |
|
|
|
Post by boonechaser on Dec 4, 2014 13:36:49 GMT -5
Don't need pic's just have a score sheet and follow direction's. (Pretty simple) When most post pic's they give a general score and most don't care what a deer score's anyways. (And yes most over state the score) LOL. If the hunter is happy with it, in the end thats all that matter's. Only time a score would matter is if you are entering into one of the record book's. Official scorer then does the work for you.
|
|
|
|
Post by parrothead on Dec 4, 2014 14:28:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by firstwd on Dec 5, 2014 6:38:17 GMT -5
All of the detailed information is good to know. It let's me know that my estimates have been way off because I didn't know the whole "abnormal" thing with a "typical" rack. It also tells me that my idea of getting a 150+ for the wall is out, the character points are generally too cool for me to look down upon a deer for having them.
One more thought, shouldn't B&C be against high mineral food plots and mineral stations since they are attributed to increased antler growth and character development?
|
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Dec 5, 2014 6:46:30 GMT -5
All of the detailed information is good to know. It let's me know that my estimates have been way off because I didn't know the whole "abnormal" thing with a "typical" rack. It also tells me that my idea of getting a 150+ for the wall is out, the character points are generally too cool for me to look down upon a deer for having them. One more thought, shouldn't B&C be against high mineral food plots and mineral stations since they are attributed to increased antler growth and character development? There is no Data or any study to prove this info.....good sales pitch though!!! |
|
|
|
Post by M4Madness on Dec 5, 2014 11:05:13 GMT -5
The character points are generally too cool for me to look down upon a deer for having them. I'd take the double droptine buck every time. |
|
