Thoughts on Pope Young, Boone Crockett Scoring System?

Homepage Forums Talk Huntin’ Whitetails Thoughts on Pope Young, Boone Crockett Scoring System?

Viewing 15 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #82294
      Jarrod Erdody
      Keymaster

      I’m curious what ya’ll think about the current scoring systems used out there. Personally, I don’t like them. I would measure racks by antler VOLUME, plain and simple. And I’d add a spread score. Dip the rack in a tank of water, measure the displacement, and know just how much antler is on his head. Didn’t say this would be easy or practical, but this is what I would do… probably structure like you measure 1/4″ up from the crown or something and put tape around it, and dip to that line… a shame to see racks not get credit for heavy tines, etc. every sporting goods store could have a “dunk tank” where you could bring a rack in to measure it….

      What do ya’ll think about the SCI or Buckmasters systems?

    • #82295
      RUTIN
      Member

      Couldnt agree more…. this has been an idea thrown around by alot of us in OH. Obviously your first score would reflect after the dry period but when you run into scenerios where record deer score the same like here in ohio there would have to be an age calculator for shrinkage before redipping. We had this happen with a buck killed in 1986 that was 201 7/8 typical and then another killed in 2006 scoring 201 7/8 typical. 20 years of dry time and shrinkage can go a long way but the old record holder in 86′ is a close friend and didnt care to have his rescored bc to him its a true trophy and he knows what it scored reguardless of now.

    • #82296

      “Jarrod” wrote: I’m curious what ya’ll think about the current scoring systems used out there. Personally, I don’t like them. I would measure racks by antler VOLUME, plain and simple. And I’d add a spread score. Dip the rack in a tank of water, measure the displacement, and know just how much antler is on his head. Didn’t say this would be easy or practical, but this is what I would do… probably structure like you measure 1/4″ up from the crown or something and put tape around it, and dip to that line… a shame to see racks not get credit for heavy tines, etc. every sporting goods store could have a “dunk tank” where you could bring a rack in to measure it….

      What do ya’ll think about the SCI or Buckmasters systems?

      How ironic Jarrod, I have been preaching the same Rack Score method for years, dip in water and measure for volume through displacement. I would too add in an inside spread.

      As far as boone and crocket goes, it was originally developed in Texas I believe (read about it a long time ago) …the method was based on HORNS and not antlers. When they took the HORN scoring method for cattle and applied it to antlers they really missed the boat. I would love to see a true score. We need to start a new scoring method, “TRUE SCORE”. Some one someday will do so. I DO NOT LIKE THE BTR METHOD WITH NO SPREAD CREDIT

    • #82331
      Ryan Culvey
      Participant

      That would be a logical way to score the deer. I too do not like the current scoring system, especially net score!

    • #82338
      OHJRH
      Member

      I think its the only true way to score a deer. As long as the inside score is also included.

    • #82341

      I am gonna throw in a wrench…

      I too believe you should score what that deer produced. Mass of tines should somehow be included.

      Although my thoughts on the dipping would be the same I would NOT include a spread. Its not bone its air. Doubt anyone will agree with that but if we want to measure it as an antler score, then I am not convinced air should be included.

    • #82343
      Lee Gatzke
      Keymaster

      The system I’d prefer would measure the rack like the B&C system does but would have no deductions for left vs right differences, eliminate spread, and add in tine circumferences.

    • #82350
      Ryan Culvey
      Participant

      This would be a good way to experiment with current trophies or upcoming trophies. Take what the deer grosses using current system and then try a few other ways of doing it to see how close the scores are?

    • #82354
      Jarrod Erdody
      Keymaster

      I hear ya WW… I could go either way on spread. If two bucks each have 200″ of antler and one’s wider than another, it doesn’t always mean that one will be more impressive. Either way, the narrower one would be higher or extend farther out or something that would impress in a different direction…

    • #82380

      Tuesday night I will be at my Wis Buck and Bear Club meeting. I will bring up your thoughts, and get you an answer. One of the premier B&C scorers, is in my chapter, and will have a discussion. Anymore thing you want asked, send me a pm.

      best in field

    • #82399

      In my opinion, the gross of a rack gives an indication of overall quality. I don’t like the deduction system – if he grew it – give him credit! Count everything and tally it up. I have seen some pretty impressive racks that due to deductions didn’t score real well. Not a fan of the systems out there.

      PLH

    • #82469
      Edcyclopedia
      Member

      Here is the North East twist on B&C.

      http://www.bigbuckclub.com/Get_Scored.htm

    • #82471
      Lee Gatzke
      Keymaster

      Thanks for the link Edcyclopedia. Looks like somebody else has crossed this bridge. I’ll have to start up a club that measures the way they do but doesn’t include spread and we’re one happy camper. At least I think the NBBC includes spread, I didn’t see the fine print on that.

    • #83187
      peakrut
      Member

      I don’t have a problem with either club.

    • #83188
      WMI
      Member

      I like my method better than all of them, If the buck is over 4.5 age and has 25″ of tine length or more on each side of his rack he scores a DIRT NAP!! This way of scoring is much easier.

    • #83190
      OHJRH
      Member

      I like WMI way of scoring! Good one buddy. LOL!!!!

Viewing 15 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.