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

[killerbee]

it seem's like a decent idea?? maybe?? unlike any of the score systems it is just seeing how much BONE is up there. dont get me wrong the B&C /P&Y systems are THE ONLY way to score an animal. it peeves me when i read something like" NEW WORLD RECORD!!!!! [ sci]" i dont even like the sci methods and what they allow to be considerd a record book head [pen raised animals, freikin rediculous ]and nothing will ever be changed about the P&Y /B&C systems, it literally impossible, but there are pro's to the other methods.

[ricochet]

Killerbee-
I remember a little about that water displacement scoring system. It was developed by Dr. Joe Burkett in 1978. He eventually came up with a mathematical formula to determine displacement. His system, virtually unchanged, is used to enter the "Trophy Game Records of the World" record book.
BOHNTR-
I'm sure glad you "don't mind" if we give both scores, the REAL AND OFFICIAL score isn't important to me.

[BOHNTR]

If it's not important, then why comment at all on this thread? Here's your quote:

The problem I have with the B&C and P&Y systems is the deduction for lack of symmetry. If the animal grew it, give him credit for it. So I only pay attention to the gross score. Nets are for fish.

For someone who doesn't care about the record book, you sure do care how animals are measured. Sorry, you can't have it both ways.

[ricochet]

We all use the scoring system to share the relative size of our trophies, it doesn't mean the "book" is sacred to me. The B&C system is merely a common language for hunters to use.

[proutdoors]

I like the current system, it rewards symmetry and 'bone'. If you are a hunter who prefers just the gross score, there is always SCI.

PRO

[BOHNTR]

ricochet:

I understand what you're saying, especially using the B&C system as a common language. Nothing wrong with that. I guess what discourages me at times is when folks use the B&C / P&Y system to describe an animal and then complain about the very system they're using.

Is it the perfect system.....maybe not.....depends on who you ask. But I understand why it was created. As an official measurer for both clubs, I simply ask hunters one question when they complain about net vs. gross. Is the reason why they're complaining because they want a higher score? If so, maybe they need to re-evaluate the reason why they hunt.

[StickFlicker]

I guess what discourages me at times is when folks use the B&C / P&Y system to describe an animal and then complain about the very system they're using.

I think more specifically what Roy is trying to say, is when people completely put down these systems by saying that they are a detriment to hunting, or have no redeeming qualities, but then they site scores when they refer to different animals. Obviously without these systems and the people that do support them, there would be no "common language" for hunters to use. If you are in complete opposition to record programs, you really have no right to use the "common language" they are providing when referring to the size of animals in my opinion. I don't think Roy meant that people couldn't have an opinion as to what might make those systems better or worse, or how they wish they had been originally designed. I totally agree. I hope I didn't put words in your mouth, Roy.

[NONYA]

Just because we refer to the scoring system to describe antler size DOES NOT mean we have to like thier standads or rules,its just a commonly understood measurement that almost every hunter understands,we can dislike the system r thier rules any time we want.

[AGCHAWK]

Stickflicker/BOHNTR,

Great perspective from two official measures. Thanks guys. I always like hearing your thoughts on things such as this...and two guys with "book" animals to your credit to boot.

[BOHNTR]

Marvin.....you're spot on! Rest assured folks, there are a few rules and guidelines I do not agree with regarding BOTH clubs........however, I accept them for what they are.......a club that deploys a measuring system that is and has been recognized for years.

I do support the B&C / P&Y scoring system "as is" without complaints. It's been that way for years, with thousands of trophies measured in this manner. To change it for a "better" or "higher" score now would be a tragedy to all other entries accepted throughout the years, IMO.

The bottom line is this (IMO)......if folks want a rule changed because they don't think they should be "penalized" for something that will ultimately lower a final score, then one needs to ask themselves why they really hunt and what they're entering an animal for.

I have quite a few animals entered into the records programs for various states and clubs. A few of those "suffer" from some of the rules already mentioned. The last thing that enters my mind is to change a rule to benefit me or make the score higher. Quite frankly, I prefer to have it follow the same rules and guidleines as ALL other antlers measured. It's really not that big of a deal to me.......I guess it is to some so I do respect that.

Lastly, I wish everyone could attend a B&C / P&Y workshop and listen to the history of the club and how/why the system was implemented. It's very interesting and makes one understand the hows and whys of the system. MUCH too long to type though.