Why should any score matter?

If you kill a deer and it scores 1/8 of an inch below a record book minimum, will you be dissapointed? If you say, "no", then no score matters. If you say, "yes", then obviously the net dry score matters.

But the point being, if you are not a trophty hunter, then why would you even score one? It is either big enough for you to shoot or, it isn't.

Now let me pose a question. If all of the record keeping associations deleted the hunter's name and no longer posted names, only score, date and location of kill, how many hunters would still score bucks and have them sent in?

By rough count, I have 20 animals that meet or exceed record book minimums of one association or another. I measured them myself just to see how they compared. Then I realized, I didn't care how they compared. I haven't measured an animal in years. All of mine are "just short of a world record".