Would you like to see the minimum B&C score changed?

[BOHNTR]

I agree with the minimums set AND the scoring system in place......it was designed for symetry. For non-typicals, symetry for main frame then add the abnormal points. The "add em' all up and call it a number" system is simply that....a number....something Jackie Bushman began to get a higher number, IMO.

The OFFICIAL score is the net score. I don't mind when people give both scores, as it gives folks an idea of what the antler configuration looks like.....but the real and official score is the net.

[StickFlicker]

I've always thought the non-typical score was a little on the high side, but don't feel strongly about it. There are certainly a fraction of the mule deer in the books compared to whitetails. Also, I'm not a fan that a non-typical is penalized if its main frame is not symmetrical. I think that a NT score should be a gross score, where the animal gets credit for everything, and not penalized if four out of its 28 points might not match, but rewarded for the other 24 points being as freaky as possible. However, that being said, there is really no way to change the scoring system now, so I wouldn't recommend it. I simply would have done it differently in the beginning if it were me.

Typical is perfect how it is.

[Show_Me_Your_Rack]

I hunt deer!!!!!!!!!!! not money or records keep it the same a monster buck should be a monster as well as a record buck should be a record lets keep it the same!!!!

[killerbee]

I'm not a fan that a non-typical is penalized if its main frame is not symmetrical. I think that a NT score should be a gross score, where the animal gets credit for everything, and not penalized if four out of its 28 points might not match, but rewarded for the other 24 points being as freaky as possible. Typical is perfect how it is.

WELL SAID, i've always felt the same way TYPICAL is a perfect buck and should be scored as to which buck is the closest to being perfect- deduct the deduction, NON-TYPICAL should be gross as it is classifying bucks that are NOT TYPICAL, = score the buck with all his measurements! that to me is the meaning of non-typical!

[killerbee]

but i do agre there is no way you can lower the score you would have to create another score system: P&Y, B&C, SCI, and a new one with this scoring meathod, there is no way to go back and re-score these all these animals so you would have to just have a new system! HASE ANY ONE EVER HEARD OF THE WATER DISPLACEMENT SYSTEM? i've not heard alot about it can anyone explane anything about it??

[RooDog]

I wouldn't change a thing.

[Fortis]

The only thing I'd like to see changed with typical scoring is the spread credit deductions. I really don't understand why you get docked if the main beam is shorter than spread on main beams. What does the spread have to do with length of main beams as far as symmetry is concerned?

[skull krazy]

I'm ok with the 190 B&C minimum on the typical, it takes a heck of a buck to make that, but it's still accomplished every year.
I am actually a growing fan of the SCI scoring system, it doesn't punish a buck for having "flaws".

[loco4muleys]

I'd leave it. Seems like the set scores are just enough that it has to be a phenomenal buck to make the book.

[StickFlicker]

Basically, they completely submerse the horns or antlers in a glass tank that has measurements on it, like a measuring cup. They measure the exact volume of water that the rack displaces when submersed. It's fairly impractical, because official measurers couldn't really travel around with such a device too easily.