Author Topic: B&C scoring bias?  (Read 691 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline huntsman

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 501
B&C scoring bias?
« on: August 15, 2003, 11:48:49 AM »
Okay, here I go. I'm sure that I will stir up a hornet's nest by opening this can of worms. But sometimes you've just got to fish no matter what the bait smells like.

Having scored a few whitetail deer racks and seen many more that have been officially scored, it occurs to me that the time-tested Boone and Crockett scoring system for whitetail antlers leaves something to be desired. Yes, I know, the system has been around all these years, and it's pretty much part of the tradition and lore of deer hunting. It has a lot of good points to consider, I will grant that. But I see a definite bias toward symmetry and tine length over mass and total number of points.

I think to give whitetails their due, total antler volume must be heavily considered along with total number of legal points, total lengths of all tines and beams, and of course inside spread. While the B&C system does account for mass, it is proportionally small in the total point system (circumference rather than volume). Extra points like kickers, double brow tines, and drop tines are often a liability, especially with "typical" racks, rather than a bonus in the B&C system. I would much rather shoot a buck with a rare single drop-tine than one without any drop-tine, but with B&C these two deer are identical (when scored as typical antlers, which they may otherwise be).

A ten point deer that grows antlers with main beam circumference averaging 1" better all the way out to the end of each beam than another ten point deer is monstrously heavier-racked, but only gains 8 points on the B&C scale. Just one more inch of average tine length makes up this difference on the B&C scale for the light-antlered deer, but visualizing both racks makes one's mouth water in favor of Mr. Mass. This is even more exaggerated on deer with longer tine lengths to begin with. It seems absurd that 12" G2s on a 3" diameter main beam are superior to 10" G2s on a 4.75" main beam.

Also, the B&C system does not account for the difference in tine thickness between deer. I have seen spindly-tined deer with a couple of extra inches of tine outscore a noticeably heavier, thick-tined deer on several occasions. It seems to me that total volume is the only fair way to account for the total mass of a deer, especially odd-shaped or "non-typical" type deer.

Is there anyone else out there who has noticed this bias, or is it just my own personal little pet peave? :twisted:
There is no more humbling experience for man than to be fully immersed in nature's artistry.

Offline TScottO

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 778
B&C scoring bias?
« Reply #1 on: August 15, 2003, 01:08:36 PM »
One of my hang ups with B&C scoring is the spread. Everyone likes a wide spread and it definitely enhances how the antlers look. I personally think a deer with more antlers should score better. A spread is only open space it doesn't really mean the deer has more antler. Taller racks with more antler appeals to me more than a wider rack with less antler netting the same score. I'll vote for the high racked more antlered deer every time.

Yes, I also think the overall mass of antler should be given more credit in scoring.

Just my thoughts,
Scott

Offline denvas

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 106
B&C scoring bias?
« Reply #2 on: August 18, 2003, 02:38:16 AM »
Huntsman,

More and more "average" hunters ( as versus pure trophy hunters) are beginning to speak out on this very topic across the internet. Many of us would prefer a system that gives the animal, be it a whitetail, elk or cape buffalo, full credit for their scoring potential. This would include not only tine length, spread and main beam circumferences, but also the mass of each tine. Then and only then do you have a true picture of what the trophy quality of any given animal is. The only system that I am aware of that comes close to doing this is that operated by the Exotic Wildlife Association, The Trophy Game Records of the World. But even it is not perfect as it does not take into account the mass of each tine, only the main beam. Maybe as we go on someone will develop a scoring system that truly pays homage to an animal’s true trophy potential and not symmetry. After all nothing in nature is absolutely perfect, as B& C and P&Y try to make them.
Denvas
May the wind always blow in your face and the sun always shine over your shoulder. Then your prey will be unable to smell you and unable to see you until after they hear the crack of your shot!

Offline Tony D

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 120
B&C scoring bias?
« Reply #3 on: August 19, 2003, 07:36:49 AM »
The Buckmasters Trophy Records (BTR) scoring system does a real good job of giving full credit for the animal's headgear.  I've copied their philosophy of scoring from the website:

"The philosophy of Buckmasters' new Full-Credit Scoring System is to measure and record whitetail deer antlers without forcing them to conform to a criterion of perfect symmetry. This Full-Credit Scoring System takes nothing away from the rack. It simply measures every inch of antler and classifies it accordingly. The Buckmasters system can be distinguished from other whitetail scoring systems in these nine important areas:

The Buckmasters system does not deduct differences between lengths of opposing typical points.

It does not include the inside-spread measurement in the score because it is a measurement of air, not antler.

Since the inside spread between the main beams is not added into the rack's score, a rack with a broken skull plate can be entered into the BTR.

There are four classifications of antlers categorized as: Perfect, Typical, Semi-Irregular, and Irregular.

Minimum score is the same for each of the four categories of antlers. The minimum score for all firearms-harvested deer is 140 inches. A minimum score of 105 inches is required for all bow-harvested deer. These minimum scores may sound low until you realize the inside-spread credit is not included.

The BTR system provides categories for all types of firearms which include centerfire rifles, shotguns, handguns, and blackpowder guns. The bow-and-arrow category includes all compounds, recurves, and longbows, with a separate category for crossbows. The "Pick-Up" category is for racks which have been found rather than harvested by a hunter. The minimum score for this category is 140 inches. There is even a category for shed antlers which are measured only as right or left antlers, not as a pair. Minimum score for shed antlers is 75 inches.

No drying time is required before antlers can be measured.

The BTR also has a separate category for antlers still in velvet.

There is opportunity for entry for bucks which have been taken behind deer-proof fences, providing they meet the entrance criteria noted on the BTR Code of Ethics for Hunting On Game-Proof Fenced Properties.

The Full-Credit Scoring System does not penalize a deer's antlers because of their shape or configuration since they have no choice in how they grow. Each hunter may prefer certain antler characteristics, but to call one preference right and another preference wrong would be absurd, especially where a design of nature is concerned.

There is no justifiable reason to penalize a rack's score because of the origin of a point or the direction in which it grows. For this reason, the BTR minimum scores will be the same whether the rack is perfectly symmetrical or largely irregular. The BTR Full-Credit Scoring System's mandate is to record what nature produced, without making any assessment of its aesthetic value to the human eye.

In the case of animals such as mountain sheep or goats, there is a static horn design. These animals never depart from what is considered the norm in any way that would confuse their scoring criterion. A scoring system which is fair to one big-horn ram will be fair to all such rams because they are only created with one basic horn design. However, whitetail deer are quite another matter. For a measuring system to be as fair to deer as it is to wild sheep and goats, it must be prepared to acknowledge every antler configuration possible without penalty. This is the basis of the philosophy behind the BTR Full-Credit Scoring System.

To fully understand the Buckmasters philosophy for not including the inside-spread measurement into the rack's score, imagine a set of whitetail antlers altered to a flexible state, so that the main beams could be spread wider or narrower. In other scoring systems, the changing of the inside-spread measurement would affect the final score, either positively or negatively. However, in reality, the actual inches of antler would not be altered by widening or narrowing the inside spread. All that has really been altered is a measurement of air, not antler. For this reason, the BTR system includes the inside-spread measurement only as supplementary data for identification purposes.

When measuring typical tines, no deduction is made when one typical point does not have a matching point on the opposite antler. An example would be a 9-point rack with five typical points on one side and only four typical points on the other. BTR does not force this rack to become a hypothetical 8-pointer by deducting the unmatched point. No matter how antlers grow, the BTR will accept and record them.

By simply recording what nature produced and classifying it accurately, the BTR offers whitetail enthusiasts the opportunity to record their trophies with an unbiased, record-keeping agency that allows systematic comparison of the amazing, natural artistry of whitetail antlers."
Tony D ><>

Offline Rick Teal

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 676
B&C scoring bias?
« Reply #4 on: August 19, 2003, 03:06:21 PM »
When measuring deer antlers, the Boone and Crockett system was established to evaluate trophies, not to establish which racks are the largest or most massive.

Grancel Fitz and the boys were trophy hunters, and determined such things as height, width, mass, length, symetry and adherence of the antlers to the "normal configuration" of the species were things to be desired and credited in their system.  Personally, I have no problem with a spread credit, but I do with the deduction from the score when there is a small arithmetical difference in side-to-side measurements.  A 1/8th inch difference in the length of a tine wouldn't be noticable to the naked eye, and certainly wouldn't detract from the trophy quality of the rack.  I would rather see deductions only made if non-symetry exceeded a certain percentage (10%, 15%, etc.)

Originally there wasn't a non-typical class, and when there were requests to evaluate such freaks, they did a (poor) adaptation of their scoring system to include such animals.  It makes no sense at all to make deductions for non-symetry on an animal whose nature and value is that very non-symetry.

To me the greatest inequity in the B & C system is the evaluation of (Canada) moose antlers.  It seemed they decided that since Western Canada moose (and Yukon moose) were the largest, that all racks should be evaluated against them as a standard.  Western moose have very long and wide palmation with numerous very short points.  Eastern Canada moose have narrow and long palms with fewer points but these points usually have significant lengths.  The B & C system only counts the number of points with no credit given for their lengths.  Very few eastern racks can make it into the Canada moose record list.  This could be corrected with a separate class for eastern Canadas and a more representative way of scoring eastern trophies.
Hunting is Exciting!  Bolt actions are BORING!!
Don't mix the two!