I seen a small 6 point buck shot two years ago by a 12 year old. It was his first deer in his first hunting season. That buck in my mind is the BIGGEST buck I will ever seen taken. I still have my first buck on the wall. It is a far cry from being a 150 inch bruiser..... I'm not even sure what this buck would measure but I do know it is mine and on one fine afternoon years ago, I was able to outsmart this "monster".

Trophy should be in the eye of the beholder and not based on some number....

I agree to some extent...........but, in many cases, a deer with four 2 inch kickers and one 7 inch drop tine.......goes from being a 130 class deer to a 145 class deer....... Trash points can be deceiving........

I don't really care either way, just show me a pic, if he's big I'll say he's big......


I don't think trash points should count as deductions or add on's......

the "in-the-woods" scoring system I use is the "Holy Sh>>, look at that thing" system!! If my soul doesn't scream that, he's not big enough to shoot... I agree with everyone else, gross score. It seems like its a regional thing. I know some guys from WI and in their area they only speak "net", but they enjoy putting their animal in P&Y...to each his own.

I have my deer scored just for comparison tool and I am in a contest every year so I have to have them scored....winner is a free head mount by the taxidermist that mounted the Louveston buck(world record). He's the one that does mine anyway, but it sure would be nice to get a 'freebe'.

Double Creek, so those "trash points" you talk of are not antler growth? They should be ignored because they aren't part of a symmetrical rack? To me they are just as much part of the rack as the main beam and brow tines. Why shouldn't they be counted? I'm not saying you're wrong I just want to get your view as to why they shouldn't count.

B/C they are deceiving...... When someone thinks of score, they think of tine length, main beams, mass, ie, frame size....... Stickers and kickers do not add to frame size... Yes, they are cool and they add to character, but not frame size........

They give you an inflated score IMO........


Just like my example above.....

Say you have 2 exact 8pts that have a base frame of 130....... Now add some kickers and stickers to one of them and he is suddently a 140 class deer? I don't think so, he is the same 130 class buck with some trash..... Both bucks have an equally impressive frame size, one simply has more character........

To play devil's advocate one doesn't simply have more character, it has more antler. Your argument is like saying that a guy that is 6' tall and weighs 170 lbs. is the same as a guy that is 6' tall and weighs 230 lbs. but the 230 lb. guy just has more muscle. They're the same in the skeleton though, right? No, the 230 lb. guy is bigger, and a buck with more "trash" has more antler.

I see where you are coming from. You like symmetry and main frame size and that is fine. I just differ in opinion that a buck with some extra antler should have that extra antler counted. Does a buck with extra antler in kickers and stickers look the same as a buck that has equal inches but more mass and tine length? No, but the antler still exists.

I don't tend to pay much attention to deductions. I tend to think if the deer grows it then it counts. However, DC has a point. I have seen some bucks that wound up scoring in the 150's or 160's because of stickers etc. that IMO weren't 150 - 160 class bucks. They may have grown the antler but their rack wasn't comparable to that of the more typical 150s and 160's. JMO

thats the most accurate measureing ever btomlin

Any deer that graces our walls or happens to sit in my living room is called by it's GROSS score. I just believe it more accurately represents the rack. I have a personal goal every year bowhunting, 140" or better, OR has a lot of character. My harvest this year was hardly 140, but danged if he wasnt full of character! The 140" or better is for management. Once I shoot a 140" deer, I will probably move that number up to 150" we'll see.

Silent, I agree. Some bucks don't look as big as their score indicates and in fact look inferior to bucks that reach those numbers without extra points, but the extra points are there so they belong in the score. That doesn't mean that buck is equal to one that "looks" bigger, but those points are still on that deer's rack.