Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2012 15:08:09 GMT -5
I like Gross Score. Gross Scores give the exact inches of Antler a Buck actually has. Does do not have antlers bucks do, therefore every inch of Anlter should count. Problems with the B &C Net Score. A smaller Buck can outscore a larger don't make the books that are just as big as the Bucks that do make the Books. All you have to do is have it scored NT, but then it won't come close to the higher minimum, but it should make ou happy that ou got to count all the bone.
|
|
|
Post by firstwd on Sept 24, 2012 15:13:00 GMT -5
Gross score. Just seem's silly to deduct inches of antler if that's what your scoring in the first place. IMO if they would just measure gross inches of antler and be done with it, it would make it simple for everyone. But of course it won't happen because it would be simple and easy. WHO WANT'S THAT? LOL Isn't the BTR score every inch of antler without the spread measurments?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2012 15:15:17 GMT -5
Yes, but it's not THE scoring system of choice.
|
|
|
Post by tynimiller on Sept 24, 2012 15:39:48 GMT -5
Yep.....that's me....with the exception of the guys that have 159 7/8" (or less) buck and still presist in saying they have a Booner, when it's obvious that they don't. They have a nice buck and should be proud of it, by it's not a qualifier and will not make the book. It they want to tell their buddies it's a WR, so be it. But it's not. B&C to me is a sign of being in one kind of elite club, highly recognizeable but just one kind. You tell someone you shot a 175 inch gross whitetail buck, and knowledgeable hunters are going to be impressed just the same as if you said I shot a B&C 175 incher. I agree though B&C is a highly respected "club" if you will and is highly recognizable. However, stating it's not THE choice scoring system is an opinion. My choice scoring is one with the spread and abnormal points but also adds the spread (no deductions at all)...which I believe is how Safari scores.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2012 15:57:01 GMT -5
Nope, you can shoot a 175" deer on a game farm. You can't shoot a 175" B & C buck there.
Safari Club does very few "wi;d" WT Deer. They do the preserves though, so it's avastly different "club"
B & C insist on Fair Chase, some of the others don't, same as P & Y.
Again, if you have one, you want it scored B & C, the other systems are made for the ones that won't qualify.
Also, note that we're talking about deer here. They score every animal that is known to be in the wild and hunted. They all reward for typical balanced horns or antlers or skulls. sometimes you get in, sometimes you don't. An 1/8 of an inch can make a difference
|
|
|
Post by chootem on Sept 24, 2012 16:41:59 GMT -5
IMHO....
Bucks should be neither "typical" or "non-typical". They should just be bucks and should be scored by their whole antlers (gross score). The problem is our society has been so engrossed with perfection categorizing everything since the beginning of time. IE.... beautiful/ugly, skinny/fat, etc. Besides it shouldn't be about the rack. It should be more about the meat provided for the hunter and his/her family.
As I said, this is my honest opinion and it works for me. I'm not trying to sway anyone else's opinion.
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Sept 24, 2012 16:43:45 GMT -5
B&C and P&Y count air (inside spread) ...Gross & Net scores is not all about "antlers" it also represents a inside spread..... And that's a GOOD THING...
|
|
|
Post by bowhunterjohn on Sept 24, 2012 16:51:17 GMT -5
if they grew it, it should count, ain't nothin perfect in this world
funny at 4H they dont' split a cow or pig down the middle and weigh each side, then adjust the gross weight by the difference in the two sides do they ?
I am not a record book person anyway, nothing against anyone that is.
|
|
|
Post by bowhunterjohn on Sept 24, 2012 16:53:01 GMT -5
IMHO.... Bucks should be neither "typical" or "non-typical". They should just be bucks and should be scored by their whole antlers (gross score). The problem is our society has been so engrossed with perfection categorizing everything since the beginning of time. IE.... beautiful/ugly, skinny/fat, etc. Besides it shouldn't be about the rack. It should be more about the meat provided for the hunter and his/her family. As I said, this is my honest opinion and it works for me. I'm not trying to sway anyone else's opinion.[/quote Well said !
|
|
|
Post by sakorifle on Sept 24, 2012 17:06:33 GMT -5
in Europe as i have pointed out before points can be deducted for looks, it is a complete nonsense beauty is in the eye of the beholder otherwise we would all be chasing the same lady, regards billy
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2012 17:56:59 GMT -5
You fellows that say count every point or fraction of an inch, would eliminate the King buck, Hansen's buck, the Jordan buck and every other lessor scoring TYPICAL. Mind boggling to think that would be a workable system.
Billy, are you saying that men judge women by what thy look like? Don't they go by weight alone(meat)? Say a lady has one eye and 4 ears, do you think her chances are as good as a beauty contest contestant??
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2012 17:59:02 GMT -5
You fellows that say count every point or fraction of an inch, would eliminate the King buck, Hansen's buck, the Jordan buck and every other lessor scoring TYPICAL. Mind boggling to think that would be a workable system. ? You could still classify typical and non typical, just use gross scores. Simple.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2012 18:03:07 GMT -5
Read the above posts, one guy wants to weigh em, one guy wants to count them all in the same catagory. It's not really simple unless you leave it alone and just follw the rules already tested.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2012 18:14:59 GMT -5
Which is a bigger buck?
A. A clean 10 pointer that grosses 161 and nets 160.
B. A 14 pointer that has two tines broken off half way down that would have totaled 12 more inches on his left side. The buck grosses 170 as is. However, he would grossed 182 before breaking off. Now, he not only loses that 12 inches off the gross, but he is penalized 12 MORE inches in symmetry. Suddenly, he nets 158.
Now I ask again, which is the bigger buck?
That is what bugs me about the system.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2012 18:21:07 GMT -5
Under your system or B & C? How are you going to measure a popint that is gone? You not only have to be fair to the guys who has the broke rack, but also have to be fair to thousands that have qualified before him.
You don't score a basketball game on near misses, or any other sport for that matter.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2012 18:26:15 GMT -5
Exactly! If you miss a shot in basketball, you don't score a point, but you don't take points off the scoreboard as well! Thanks for the analogy, that helps me make my point even more clearly.
Net scoring creates a double jeopardy situation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2012 18:38:46 GMT -5
Go ahead and explain how your going to score the broke off points???
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2012 19:06:44 GMT -5
The broken points DON'T score, as I clearly laid out in my example. However, under the net system, not only do they not score, the are also penalized for messing up the symmetry from the other side.
Obviously, you shouldn't score broken off points anymore than you would score a missed free throw, but why then DEDUCT points? "He missed that free throw, take a point from his team". Get it?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2012 19:17:44 GMT -5
Lack of semmetry.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2012 19:20:52 GMT -5
That's the part that is silly. The lack of symmetry is already reflected in the gross score because the buck scores less on one side of his rack than the other. Yet, someone, way back when, decided we needed to penalize the score further by taking inches away from the score because one side scored less than the other. That us the double jeopardy aspect of net scores. It is just silly.
|
|