Author Topic: Score this buck!!!!!!!!!!!! WOW he is a Dandy! (Read 1531 times)

billy_56081 · « **on:** October 18, 2009, 06:40:48 AM »

THese pictures were taken on my friends hunting land in the end of August. I am thinking +170 inches total gross.

image hosting by [url

Mohawk · « **Reply #1 on:** October 18, 2009, 07:13:12 AM »

I agree, Billy. I might even say 180. A little more width and I would even go higher. I can see he is a night prowler. Thanks for the pics. Great Buck!!!

dukkillr · « **Reply #2 on:** October 18, 2009, 07:34:37 AM »

His gross might be in the 170s but his net wouldn't be very good. Great buck, but he's one of those that hunters want and record books dont. He won't have enough inches to make non-typical and his lack of symetry will crush his typical score. I think his left side is only a base 4 point.

billy_56081 · « **Reply #3 on:** October 18, 2009, 09:20:01 AM »

He defintley is a 5 x 5 10 point main frame buck with 3 extra points, a sticker on each G2 and a drop tine on his left main beam. Of all the deer I have shot, I have never entered any in "the book". I'm thinking this deer is 4.5 or 5.5 years old, no pot belly or sway back yet on him. Very good buck for southern MN.

Graybeard · « **Reply #4 on:** October 18, 2009, 10:03:18 AM »

I suspect he will easily gross in the 170s or even in excess of 180 depending on just how much mass points he can muster. He is pretty symetrical really so other than the three odd points won't lose too much to deducts. I wouldn't be surprised if he netted at least darn close to 160 if he is really as symetrical as it appears he is. Those stickers are small and really so is the drop so don't take away a huge amount.

Personally I prefer bucks with character points like those over one with a clean rack and could care less what B&C or P&Y scores them at.

billy_56081 · « **Reply #5 on:** October 18, 2009, 10:40:36 AM »

I like em with character too Bill. This one just knocked my socks off. If they don't get him in slug season, I'll be going there bow and muzzle loading.

WSMBUCK · « **Reply #6 on:** October 18, 2009, 12:27:48 PM »

I would say 160's gross and 150's net beams & G4 arent long enough to put him any higher.

Graybeard · « **Reply #7 on:** October 18, 2009, 12:36:47 PM »

Ya might be right. I'm thinking the brows at least that straight one is at least 8" likely longer. I believe the G3s and G2s to be in the 12" to 14" range respectively. I'm calling the beams at least 24" and likely no less than 26" and spread around 22" to 24". Mass is what I just dunno what kinda number to assign but it looks really massive and being a ten point gets full mass credits.

Whatever the book score that's one mighty fine buck.

billy_56081 · « **Reply #8 on:** October 18, 2009, 02:52:49 PM »

It was nice he posed for 3 nice pictures. This buck will be pretty large bodied also. I'd guess he will go 200 lb dressed. I'm thinking 4.5 or 5.5 on age.

WSMBUCK · « **Reply #9 on:** October 18, 2009, 07:01:42 PM »

That is a good deer but it ant no where close to being in the 170 to 180's more like 150 and he isnt close to being 22 to 24 inches wide either this deer is 25 and that other ant no where close and this one didnt score but 164 net!!!!!! but dont get me wrong he sure is a fine deer he just ant a 170 class deer

billy_56081 · « **Reply #10 on:** October 19, 2009, 01:14:04 AM »

I never asked or said what I figured the net was. I have sever deer that would make book on the wall. I haven't entered tehm because I dont believe in net only gross.

Graybeard · « **Reply #11 on:** October 19, 2009, 02:47:32 AM »

If you think the inside spread of that buck is only 25" then you are measuring it incorrectly. Now for an "official" B&C or P&Y score the inside spread credit cannot exceed the length of the longest beam so that might be all the credit it got but that rack is wider than 25" at the maximum spread point which on it appears to be darn near the tips of the beams which isn't true for most racks.

Terry1 · « **Reply #12 on:** October 19, 2009, 04:56:31 AM »

Quote from: billy_56081 on October 19, 2009, 01:14:04 AM

I never asked or said what I figured the net was. I have sever deer that would make book on the wall. I haven't entered tehm because I dont believe in net only gross.

I agree. To subtract points away from a rack after a animal grew it is stupid. The score should be the total inches added, period.

WSMBUCK · « **Reply #13 on:** October 19, 2009, 12:48:50 PM »

This deer is in the book and i know how wide he is it is 25 and beams were 26 1/8 and 27 .

Mohawk · « **Reply #14 on:** October 19, 2009, 12:53:17 PM »

Quote from: WSMBUCK on October 18, 2009, 07:01:42 PM

That is a good deer but it ant no where close to being in the 170 to 180's more like 150 and he isnt close to being 22 to 24 inches wide either this deer is 25 and that other ant no where close and this one didnt score but 164 net!!!!!! but dont get me wrong he sure is a fine deer he just ant a 170 class deer

Width ain't everything. I bet his is 170-182. If you have the width, the heigth should be congruent and vice versa to a certain respect. A very wide display that is not tall is not congruent. A great deer, indeed, but wide and low is no different than narrow and tall.

WSMBUCK · « **Reply #15 on:** October 19, 2009, 01:05:19 PM »

Mohawk · « **Reply #16 on:** October 19, 2009, 01:14:56 PM »

We can all disagree. There is several thousand years of experience on this forum so don't worry about what we have and have not experienced. Whatever this buck scores we have expressed our opinions. We should just leave it at that. I have legally killed deer with a .38 Special revolver, behind the shoulder, and still get teased. Don't care. Great bunch of folks here. We all never stop learning.

WSMBUCK · « **Reply #17 on:** October 19, 2009, 01:35:08 PM »

I agree !!!!!!!!!!! like i said he is a damn good deer and i would shoot him if he didnt score but 50

billy_56081 · « **Reply #18 on:** October 19, 2009, 02:30:24 PM »

MY question is, if this deer and one that was exactly the same except one didn't have the hooks on the G2's and drop tine, which one would you shoot? I know I'd shoot the one with the junk without a second thought.

Ethan · « **Reply #19 on:** December 06, 2009, 02:23:28 PM »

I would say !80-187 in that range some where.

billy_56081 · « **Reply #20 on:** December 06, 2009, 02:28:15 PM »

Within a mile of this picturethere was a buck shot that was pushing 200 gross inches. I was hunting there today and screwed up about a 140 inch buck. Don't know what went wrong. 50 yard shot, swear I heard the bullet slap and seen it hit about the back end of the ribs, fresh snow, tracke 3/4 mie on the track with no blood. I hope I was wrong and completly missed.

I am just feeling sick.

Lon371 · « **Reply #21 on:** December 06, 2009, 10:07:32 PM »

Personally I dont care what he scores. I say it is a nice looking deer. And would be more than pround to EAT HIM!

billy_56081
Sorry to hear about the miss. That is why they dont calling Killing instead of hunting

Lonny

bigbuckdown280 · « **Reply #22 on:** December 07, 2009, 03:36:29 AM »

Super nice deer you have there, and I hope you get him so we get to find out what he scores. I've put tape to alot of horns and I think he'll gross in the high 150's to low 160's. Kill him so we can find out!!!

Squib · « **Reply #23 on:** December 07, 2009, 03:43:47 AM »

billy if you need help downing the venison... let me know

efremtags · « **Reply #24 on:** December 07, 2009, 01:20:06 PM »

I think that buck is a waste of time and genetics. You should tell me where he's at so I can remove the temptation of you wasting a good tag on a bad deer. Email me the GPS co-ordinates of the pics.

I'd lose sleep over that deer.

Big Nasty · « **Reply #25 on:** December 07, 2009, 02:53:36 PM »

That deer has a better score than mine, and mine grossed 185 7/8 and net 181 0/8 non typical 16 points total.