Scoring bucks
#1
Spike
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Michigan
Posts: 80
Scoring bucks
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.
#2
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.
#3
Typical Buck
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Where animals get eaten
Posts: 671
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.
#4
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.
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.
Last edited by rockport; 12-24-2013 at 07:42 AM.
#5
Spike
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Michigan
Posts: 80
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.
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.
Last edited by TheDudeAbides; 12-24-2013 at 07:48 AM. Reason: typo
#6
Typical Buck
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Where animals get eaten
Posts: 671
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.
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.
#7
Spike
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Michigan
Posts: 80
Yeah, I agree with you there. I think gross score is the way to go.
#9
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.
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.
#10
Typical Buck
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Where animals get eaten
Posts: 671
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.
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.