HuntingNet.com Forums - 204" buck taken in Wis.

Page 3 of 3

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

HuntingNet.com Forums (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/)

- Bowhunting (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/bowhunting-18/)

- - 204" buck taken in Wis. (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/bowhunting/210460-204-buck-taken-wis.html)

npockat32

10-12-2007 12:12 PM

RE: 204" buck taken in Wis.

Quote:

ORIGINAL: MILLERTIME10

Simmer down npockat, no one is calling you out, just stating what they see and their opinion.

I don't question the 200" part, man look at the eye guards on that thing, that one has to be atleast 10-11". Nice deer none the less, 160" or 200", it doesn't matter.

Alright but I get angry when I know what I am talking about. It was a gross score of 203 not a net score. Yeah it is a nice buck and congrats to the kid. That's a chance in a lifetime deer!!!

wis_bow_huntr

10-12-2007 12:27 PM

RE: 204" buck taken in Wis.

npockat andI work together and he informed of the kill a day or so after the buck was killed. he speaks highly of the kid who shot the buck and he does know the family personally. Npockat is a very respectable guy and is a very truthful guy, theres no reason not to believe him.

Prairie Wolf

10-12-2007 12:36 PM

RE: 204" buck taken in Wis.

This seems somewhat obvious, but nobody has mentioned it, but they were talking about the 11:34 pic, which doesn't look like a 200 inch to me (but what do I know), vs. the 12:50 pic which is very obviously a different deer.

Just so you can all untwist your undergarments.

solocamcan

10-12-2007 02:26 PM

RE: 204" buck taken in Wis.

Quote:

ORIGINAL: Prairie Wolf

This seems somewhat obvious, but nobody has mentioned it, but they were talking about the 11:34 pic, which doesn't look like a 200 inch to me (but what do I know), vs. the 12:50 pic which is very obviously a different deer.

Just so you can all untwist your undergarments.

I second that...I was refering to the first picture, that first pic is NO way 200" or bigger, I'd give youALL of my hunting stuff if you can prove that FIRST deer is over 200", it isn't going to happen. The second is a different story, and why try to confuse people by posting two diffrent pictures?

solocamcan

10-12-2007 02:30 PM

RE: 204" buck taken in Wis.

[quote]ORIGINAL: npockat32

Quote:

ORIGINAL: MILLERTIME10

Alright but I get angry when I know what I am talking about. It was a gross score of 203 not a net score. Yeah it is a nice buck and congrats to the kid. That's a chance in a lifetime deer!!!

Your smoking something if you think that black and white picture of the typical, not the non-typical color picture is more than 200" net or gross. It's a damn nice deer reguardless. I'd cream myself, but 203?...c'mon.

jpot141

10-12-2007 02:37 PM

RE: 204" buck taken in Wis.

Yeah, that first buck, the 15ptr........more like 100''. It's just so small.....;)

I don't even think I'd shoot it, looks too much like bambi......;)

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:54 AM.

Page 3 of 3

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page