ORIGINAL: buckeye
While I don't have the facts in front of me, I'd have to say that "statistically" a 150in deer in Ill. or WI. or IA. Etc..is considered a "top end deer". Are there bigger ones? Sure, these are big buck states after all.
Although I do not live in those states, but by looking over record book entries.... I would think 150 is on the light side of a "top end" buck for those areas.... Big yes.... Top end? I really wouldn't think so.
In my area the air is getting pretty thin on 150 class bucks, but I would say you are looking more at 160+ to be considered top end.
IMO a top end whitetail isn't the "buck of a lifetime" It is a buck of many lifetimes....
I said I'm sure Illinois has more of their "top end deer" than PA does....the operative word being "their" and not just "top end deer" in general.
This could be true... But I really have no idea... PA has a lot more deer than IL... But %age wise IL very well may be ahead in that department.
I agree Scott and I might be willing to add a few inches to the 150 number but I just listed 150 because like you said in some states the air gets a little thin above 150. I think where we differ is in our definition of top end. I don't necessarily believe a top end deer needs to be close to a record to be a top end buck.
All we can do is look at the statistics that we have and they are as plain as day. Year in and year out (for whatever reason) as a whole the big buck states produce and the states like PA, NC, VA, etc...don't. I for one don't believe it's from a lack of trying on the hunters parts, I believe those bigger (150 Plus) deer just aren't as abundant as they are in say Illinois as an example. Therefore it only stands to reason that their "criteria" for a "top end" or "trophy" deer will also beproportionatelydifferent than my states criteria.
Later bud.....time to cook, will check back in tonight.