buckmine - There are a couple of systems based on the total amount of antler grown. One of them is the Burkett system. One of them is based on the amount of water displaced by the rack, another is based on the weight of the antlers. If you are interested in the details I'll lookup the various systems when I get home and I'll post the various systems.

The big problem with any of these systems that has kept them from becoming popular is that they are not very descriptive of the antlers being scored. If you hear a buck is a mainframe 10 point typical that grosses 220 B&C it creates a mental picture that we can relate to. Do you get the same mental picture if I tell you I killed a buck whose rack displaces 2900 cc of water?

I think the B&C system is the best system currently being used. I think the gross score is more descriptive and more accurately reflects the size of a buck’s antlers than does the net score.

I personally would like to see the B&C system modified so that nontypical points and side to side asymmetry are not deducted unless it exceeds a certain percentage of the racks gross score. It seems to me a shame that a head that is larger and more impressive in every dimension can be listed lower than another head because of a few inches in side to side differences or a few short nontypical points.

The Breen buck that you mention is a prime example of this inequity. Many deer antler collectors and aficionados for years considered the Breen buck to be larger and more impressive than the Jordan buck. The Jordan buck reigned for years as B&C’s World Record because of it’s almost perfect symmetry, even though higher gross scoring typical bucks have been taken.



Edited by - RuRu12 on 01/18/2002 11:20:36