B&C and P&Y Scoring (not fair)
 

ok Im probably gonna get blasted here, but here goes my rant! On the official scores a deer is deducted inches because of differences wether he be typical or non typical, No one but the Buckmasters scoring system ( and oh god how I hate Jackie Bushman) actually recognizes the gross score of a deer! Thats not fair to the actuall inches of antler the deer has grown (IMO).
Now I know not everyone cares about a deer scores, but the subject here is the scoring method! What do yall think!

Symetrical racks are purtier though

I like a trashy deer, points every where

i think it sucks too cause some people dont qualify for records or miss top record just because of technicalities whats the difference in my opinion

if its hardened bone, it should count, the king buck made me think of this

I have to agree. I think that a deer's score should reflect the total inches of antler it has because deducting the differences just take away from true size of the deer. Just my 2 cents

sci recognizes every inch.

in b&c and p&y
the only inches deducted from a nontypical is the inches for symmetry not for the non typical points un less the rack in question is to be scored as a typical upon which the non typical points will be deducted.

and is exactly why the net score is unfair to the actuall size of the deer

It should be every inch of what the buck has grown.. After all, thats what we are looking at when we see a big buck. We don't say WOW look at all the deductions on that rack, No sir, we say look how BIG, and we think its big because we are looking at it as how many total inches its going to be... Taking away inches off a rack is just not right.... EVER!!....

we have to step back and look at it from the point of time in which these scoring organizations started. it is my belief that at the time they were started most hunters favored a symmetrical rack. but now alot more are favoring the all inchs score policy. that is why there are so many organizations now. B&C and P&Y have been around so long i doubt they ever go anywhere.

not to highjack your post..

do you think the spread should be added into the score? it is not inchs of bone.

They are private organizations that can do what they like. They decided that perfect symmetry is important. They get to set the rules. I think they did give in when non-typical was added (assuming it was after the orginal rules).

While I agree that I like to measure every inch and I don't see a big 8 as better than a big 9, I also don't really care about P&Y or B&C record books. They don't show the animla off but the hunter. If they are for the animal then they wouldn't list the hunter.

trust me i agree cuz i shot a but that grossed 158 5/8 but net was 125 1/8 cuz it had a broken G2 and wasnt perfict and it kinda pissed me off but everytime i look at it about my fire place i still see a 158 even tho the paper dont say that

That's why I think the weight of a rack is much more indicative of the size than even the gross score would suggest. I am not real familiar with the Buck Master scoring system, but B&C and P&Y do not take into account the mass of the tines themselves, so there is bone not being accounted for even in the gross score. As an example, I have seen both the Jordan Buck (former world record typical) and the Hanson Buck (current world record typical) in person and the Jordan Buck is more impressive because of the sheer mass of the entire rack including the tines themselves. While the Hanson Buck is surely impressive, it looks spindly compared to the Jordan Buck. While I am not sure, I would bet that there is more actual bone in the Jordan rack than the Hanson rack. Just some food for thought.

thats a double edged sword, the deer ought to get "credit" for the spread, but your correct, its not inches of bone... i guss thats the bonus inches the

I also killed a buck that grossed 161 5/8 and netted 137 3/8 because of deductions. Buck field dressed 240lb was aged at 7 1/2 years old. A great mature deer. He has all kinds of character , I feel very blessed to have been able to take him, but like you, it just irks me to no end. I still see a great deer when I see him, then again when I hear someone say they took a 160 class deer, you know just what it is they have taken, especially if it is after deductions.