TheDudeAbides

How do you guys feel about the B&C scoring system/Pope & young or Buckmaster's BTR system? I don't exactly agree with B&C's emphasis on symmetry and all of its deductions. I like the BTR and how it measures every inch of bone, because I feel that's whats matters. BTR does not include the inside spread though because that is a measurement of air, but it is noted for reference.

deernutz

I completely agree with you. It should be total inches of bone. If the animal has a typical rack it should be total inches. That’s why I don't have anything in the books. But it is what it is. I've seen some really outstanding deer not given its due justice because of the faulty scoring system. My bull this year is teetering on the B&C books around the 368 gross mark but after deductions I don't think he'll make it.

skinnnner

I think both methods have their weaknesses.i would want a inside spread count since it does describe the rack in a mathamatical way but i also think total inches of horn should mean something.but ill stick to the b and c way of doing it just because its the most widely used method.

rockport

If they did just use the total the required score would have to be higher anyway.

I think it would be good just to add a simple total antler category but if you just missed they typical requirement you probably wouldn't make that either.

TheDudeAbides

Yes all scoring systems have their flaws. With the B&C I just don't appreciate the deductions. I love nice wide symmetrical bucks, I think they are beautiful. To me a buck with kickers and other irregular points (aka "junk") are very cool too and give the buck character. I just don't agree with penalizing a deer because one tine is shorter than the other. To me antler is antler and all of it should be counted. With the BTR I guess maybe they could include the inside spread.

I know someone is gonna bring it up, so I'll just say this. I don't care if the BTR was created by the Bucksmasters company/Jackie Bushman or if you feel it's a ploy for them to get profit/publicity. That is not what I'm here to discuss. I do feel that their system may be more fair then B&C, even though B&C is the most recognized scoring system out there.

skinnnner

With b and c you do get a net score and a gross score,yes the net score is what the books use but most hunters just use the gross score.putting one in the books is not everything but it nice to have a universal way of compareing trophys.

TheDudeAbides

Yeah, I agree with you there. I think gross score is the way to go.

skinnnner

Does the btr way allow fenced animals to be entered?

Lunkerdog

I guess arbitrary isn't the right word but... What do they really measure??? Bone... Does a bigger rack mean it's the most dominant animal in the woods?

Here's my point... A couple of years ago I saw one of the most beautiful 8 point mounts I've ever seen... Damn that rack had mass... It gross B&C scored in the upper 160's... Add a tine on each side and that buck makes the books... But I can just about guarantee you that buck was as dominant as any in the region.

Maybe some of us take measuring "bone" a little to seriously... Not to be accusatory... I would love to shoot a book buck as much as the next guy, but the rack is really just measuring one element of a mature buck.

skinnnner

The real element to a trophy is not the rack anyways its experiance of the hunt,or atleast it should be.i know watching my son take his first deer will out weigh my experiance of shooting my largest buck.